Regulator action · 25 September 2024
In re DoNotPay, Inc. ("AI lawyer" claims)
FTC consent order, announced 25 September 2024, finalised 2025 · United States Federal Trade Commission
What it means for your code
Legal, medical or financial AI has to be described as what it is. Say it is assistance, keep evidence of how well it performs, and do not imply a licensed professional's judgement.
What happened
A service marketed as 'the world's first robot lawyer' claimed to replace a human lawyer, without testing whether its output matched what a lawyer would produce and without any lawyer reviewing it.
What was decided
Claiming an AI product performs a professional service to a human professional's standard is deceptive unless it is substantiated by evidence; the company must notify affected subscribers and stop the claims.
⚖ USD 193,000 and mandatory notices to subscribers
The legal test applied
- A claim that an AI product performs a professional service to a professional's standard is an objective claim needing substantiation
- Testing against the professional benchmark must exist before the claim is made
- Affected subscribers must be told the claim was unsupported
What would have changed the outcome
- Describing the product as assistance, with measured accuracy claims and human review, is not the practice condemned
Source: United States Federal Trade Commission, www.ftc.gov. Summary and analysis by Lawpatch. Risk analysis, not legal advice; the law may have moved on since this decision.