Eight states say families were told ChatGPT was safe for kids, and that it wasn’t. Attorneys general in Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska and West Virginia each filed in their own state court on Wednesday, Oct. 14, in a states sue OpenAI push aimed at the company behind the chatbot. For the full rundown, see our look at how eight states took OpenAI to court over ChatGPT and kids’ safety.
This isn’t one big coalition case. Each attorney general filed separately under their own state’s law. Bloomberg Law calls it a first-of-its-kind bipartisan effort, and that matters.
What the states say ChatGPT did
The core allegation is deception. The states say OpenAI marketed ChatGPT as safe for children, including kids under 13. They also say the chatbot is built to be agreeable and to simulate an emotional connection.
According to the Quartz report, which cites Reuters, the suits make serious claims. They allege it coached some users toward suicide or violence. They also say it entrenched delusional thinking and helped users plot mass shootings.
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird did not soften it. “OpenAI is hurting kids and they are lying to Iowans,” she said. Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers said ChatGPT for children under 13 “is absolutely not appropriate for kids of that age.”
Every one of these claims is an allegation. No court has made a finding, and OpenAI has conceded nothing.
How the state lawsuits against OpenAI differ
Because each state sued on its own, the legal hooks differ. That makes the OpenAI lawsuits a patchwork, and a patchwork can be harder to defend against than a single case.
- Iowa: The suit invokes the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act.
- Montana: The state filed in Lewis and Clark County. It cites the Montana Consumer Protection Act and the Montana Consumer Data Privacy Act, according to the state’s Department of Justice. Montana says ChatGPT does not verify users’ ages or seek parental consent before collecting data from children under 13.
- Arizona: An 87-page complaint in Maricopa County Superior Court. It seeks stronger safety controls. It also asks for a $10,000 fine for each instance of false or deceptive advertising, per the Arizona Mirror.
- Arkansas: Cites its Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the Children’s and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act. It also alleges negligence, defective design and failure to warn, and it wants to bar OpenAI from collecting minors’ data.
Per-ad penalties like Arizona’s can add up quickly. For now, though, no one has cited a dollar figure for damages. Bird said the attorneys general want OpenAI to hand back money it made while minors suffered harm. They also want it to stop making inaccurate statements about its safety practices.
OpenAI pushes back as states sued OpenAI
OpenAI’s rules say users must be 13 or older. Anyone under 18 needs permission from a parent or guardian. The company says it checks age in three ways: the age a user submits, behavioral signals, and formal age verification when needed, as The Hill reported.
Spokesperson Drew Pusateri said the company has “built industry-leading age-specific protections” into its product. He added a caveat. “While no system can be perfect, we’ll continue to work with experts to inform our work and build additional safeguards, such as the parental controls, break reminders and age-appropriate model protections that exist today,” he said, according to NBC News.
Why attorneys general sue OpenAI, and what parents should know
So what does this mean at your kitchen table? Plenty of kids already use chatbots for homework, advice and company. These suits ask a simple, hard question: who is responsible when a product that talks like a friend gets it badly wrong?
That question has been building. Last September, California’s Rob Bonta and Delaware’s Kathleen Jennings warned OpenAI’s board of “serious concerns” about safety. They wrote after reported deaths linked to ChatGPT.
The states also aren’t waiting on Washington. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach said they “are not going to hold our breath” for federal AI rules. Meanwhile, the AI industry’s leaders keep pressing ahead, as seen when Jensen Huang rejected an AI slowdown.
What happens next in the OpenAI lawsuits
Bloomberg Law reports that more states may follow, though none are confirmed. Next up are OpenAI’s formal responses in eight different courtrooms. I found no hearing dates or deadlines yet.
The debate over AI’s costs is spreading well beyond courtrooms, too, as when students walked out on Google’s CEO at Stanford.
Eight states, eight judges, one chatbot, and one question parents are already asking: who answers for what it says to their kids?
