IntelliVision Technologies Corp.

The FTC charged IntelliVision with making false and unsubstantiated claims that its facial recognition software was free of gender and racial bias and highly accurate, when the FTC said it was trained on roughly 100,000 faces and had not been adequately tested. A final order was entered in January 2025.

Resolved. Refunded, settled, ceased operating, or the claim did not hold up. Kept for the record.

What was claimed

IntelliVision sold facial recognition software built on deep learning, supplied to original equipment manufacturers and to consumers, including for use in home security systems.

The company marketed the product as highly accurate and as free of gender and racial bias.

What the FTC alleged

That those claims were false and unsubstantiated. Specifically, according to the FTC:

the software was trained on approximately 100,000 faces, a figure far too small to support the accuracy claims made for it
the algorithms had not been adequately tested
performance differed across demographic groups and genders, which is precisely what the bias-free claim denied

Outcome

In January 2025 the FTC finalised an order barring IntelliVision from making false or misleading claims about its technology, requiring that any such claims rest on competent and reliable testing, and imposing compliance reporting obligations.

Why this one is worth reading even though nobody lost money

There is no dollar figure on this entry, and that is the point.

The claim at issue was an absence claim: that the product had no bias. An absence is harder to verify than a capability, and a buyer has almost no way to check it independently. The FTC’s answer was that a vendor asserting one must have done the testing that would establish it, and that “we did not find bias” is not the same statement as “there is no bias”.

Anyone evaluating an AI vendor can use that directly. Ask what was tested, on what population, and by whom. A vendor claiming fairness or accuracy without a testing methodology to point at is making the claim the FTC acted on here.

What is not established

An FTC order resolves allegations without any admission or finding of wrongdoing. This entry rests on secondary legal reporting of the Commission’s action rather than on the complaint text, which is noted here so a reader can weight it accordingly.

We have not yet contacted IntelliVision Technologies for comment. When we do, the attempt and any response will appear on this entry.

Sources

Every claim above rests on one of these. Open them and check.

Right of reply

If you are named here and something is wrong, dispute this entry. There is no charge, the route never expires, and your response is published unedited.

Other ai & automation entries

See all ai & automation entries, or browse the full record.