The FTC’s proposed DoNotPay agreement makes AI marketing substantiation and feature accuracy a governance question for enterprise teams. The matter concerns a proposed consent agreement, not a final Commission order, and therefore does not establish binding duties on the basis of the supplied record.
In File No. 232 3042, the Federal Trade Commission published a notice about a proposed consent agreement with DoNotPay, Inc., accepted subject to final approval, and requested public comments by October 30, 2024. The proposed complaint and accompanying analysis described allegations that DoNotPay deceptively marketed an AI-powered or generative-AI legal service and made false, misleading, or unsubstantiated claims about its capabilities, legal services, and subscription features.
The proposed order described provisions that would restrict specified misleading representations, require $193,000 in monetary relief, provide certain customer notices and information, and impose reporting, compliance, records, monitoring, and order-duration provisions. The source does not establish that the Commission gave final approval, that a final consent order took effect, or what effective-date terms would apply. For general counsel, chief AI officers, and compliance leads, the proceeding can serve as a monitoring signal for reviewing AI capability claims, subscription-feature descriptions, substantiation controls, and escalation to legal or compliance before publication.