ChatGPT Comes Under Investigation by Federal Trade Commission
FTC is examining whether the artificial-intelligence app harmed people by publishing false information
4 min
WASHINGTON—The Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether OpenAI’s ChatGPT has harmed people by publishing false information about them, posing a potential legal threat to the popular app that can generate eerily humanlike content using artificial intelligence.
In a civil subpoena to the company made public Thursday, the FTC says its investigation of ChatGPT focuses on whether OpenAI has “engaged in unfair or deceptive practices relating to risks of harm to consumers, including reputational harm.”
One question asks the company to “describe in detail the extent to which you have taken steps to address or mitigate risks that your large language model products could generate statements about real individuals that are false, misleading or disparaging.”
The new FTC investigation under Chair Lina Khan marks a significant escalation of the federal government’s role in policing the emerging technology.
Khan, who appeared before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, said the agency is concerned that ChatGPT and other AI-driven apps have no checks on the data they can mine.
“We’ve heard about reports where people’s sensitive information is showing up in response to an inquiry from somebody else,” Khan said. “We’ve heard about libel, defamatory statements, flatly untrue things that are emerging. That’s the type of fraud and deception that we are concerned about.”
For critics of the FTC, the probe represented another venture into uncharted territory for an agency that has suffered recent legal setbacks in its antitrust enforcement efforts.
“When ChatGPT says something wrong about somebody and might have caused damage to their reputation, is that a matter for the FTC’s jurisdiction? I don’t think that’s clear at all,” said Adam Kovacevich, founder of Chamber of Progress, an industry trade group.
Such matters “are more in the realm of speech and it becomes speech regulation, which is beyond their authority,” he said.
OpenAI didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Marc Rotenberg, who heads a group that filed an FTC complaint over ChatGPT in March, said it might be unclear whether the FTC has jurisdiction over defamation. But “misleading advertising is clearly within the FTC’s purview,” said Rotenberg, president of the Center for AI and Digital Policy. “And disinformation relating to commercial practices is already, according to the FTC, an area within its authority.”
Rotenberg’s group filed a complaint with the FTC in March concerning ChatGPT, terming it “biased, deceptive and a risk to privacy and public safety,” and arguing that it satisfies none of the FTC’s guidelines for AI use.
The FTC has broad authority to police unfair and deceptive business practices that can harm consumers, as well as unfair competition, but critics say Khan has sometimes pushed its authority too far—as illustrated by a federal judge’s decision this week to dismiss the FTC’s attempt to block Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.
At the House committee hearing Thursday, Khan came under fire for her agency’s investigation of Twitter’s privacy protections for consumers. Republicans say the probe was driven by progressives angry over Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter and his loosening of content moderation policies. And Twitter asked a federal court Thursday to terminate a 2022 settlement it agreed to with the FTC over alleged privacy violations, saying it had been subject to a “burdensome and vexatious enforcement investigation.”
Khan responded that the agency was only interested in protecting the privacy of users and that “we are doing everything to make sure Twitter is complying with the order.”
In its civil subpoena to OpenAI, the FTC asked the company detailed questions about its data-security practices. It cited a 2020 incident in which the company disclosed a bug that allowed users to see information about other users’ chats and some payment-related information.
Other topics covered by the FTC subpoena include the company’s marketing efforts, its practices for training AI models, and its handling of users’ personal information. The FTC inquiry was reported earlier by the Washington Post.
The Biden administration has begun examining whether checks need to be placed on artificial-intelligence tools such as ChatGPT. In a first step toward potential regulation, the Commerce Department in April put out a formal public request for comment on what it called accountability measures.
The White House’s Office of Science Technology Policy is also working to develop strategies to address both the benefits of AI, such as the possibility of using it to expand access to government services, as well as harms such as increased hacking capabilities, discriminatory decisions by AI systems, and the potential for AI-generated content to disrupt elections.
Lawmakers in both parties—led by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.)—also have made regulating artificial intelligence a priority for the current Congress.
In addition to concerns about potential reputational risks, lawmakers say they worry that AI tools can be abused to manipulate voters with disinformation, discriminate against minority groups, commit sophisticated financial crimes, displace millions of workers or create other harms. Lawmakers have been especially concerned about the risks of so-called deepfake videos that falsely depict real people taking embarrassing actions or making embarrassing statements.
But new legislation or other measures are likely months away, if not longer. And lawmakers must worry that any significant action they take will risk slowing the pace of U.S. innovation, in what is shaping up as a vital competition with China to dominate the markets for AI tools.
Even ChatGPT’s creators have urged more government oversight of AI development.
In a hearing before Congress in May, OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman called on Congress to create licensing and safety standards for advanced artificial-intelligence systems, as lawmakers begin a bipartisan push toward regulating the powerful new tools available to consumers.
“We understand that people are anxious about how it can change the way we live. We are, too,” Sam Altman said of AI technology at the Senate subcommittee hearing. “If this technology goes wrong, it can go quite wrong.”
Altman has been traveling the world talking about both the promise and perils of AI, including meeting with heads of state including French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
From bushland greens to valley reds, the country’s most awarded designers are proving that the best colour palette was never on a swatch card; it was outside the window all along.
The Australian leather house has opened an immersive four-day pop-up in Manhattan, unveiling its Bloom Collection and redefining what a product launch can look like.
The federal budget has rattled property investors. But the biggest mistake isn’t the tax changes, it’s the conclusion many are drawing from them.
2 min
The recent budget has forced a reckoning for property investors.
Negative gearing now restricted to new residential builds, the CGT discount gone and on paper, the numbers look different.
And many investors are responding by pivoting toward yield, prioritising cash flow over capital growth in a way that property strategists say misses the point entirely.
“The debate has shifted to yield versus growth as if they are opposing forces,” says Abdullah Nouh, founder of Melbourne-based buyers’ agency Mecca Property Group. “But that framing is itself the mistake.”
Nouh, who works with high-net-worth families and investors on long-term acquisition strategy, argues that capital growth remains the primary driver of genuine wealth creation and that the post-budget environment has made quality assets more important, not less.
The numbers make his case plainly. An additional $500 per week in rental income is welcome. A prestige asset appreciating by $1 million over a market cycle is transformative.
These are not equivalent outcomes, and portfolios built around yield at the expense of location and land value tend to generate income while wealth stands largely still.
The more nuanced shift Nouh is seeing among sophisticated investors is a move toward assets where both outcomes can be engineered simultaneously – established homes on substantial land in quality locations, where the existing dwelling can be repositioned, rental returns improved, and the underlying land value compounds independent of what sits on it.
For investors with existing equity, commercial property is also entering the conversation in a more serious way.
Prestige industrial assets, medical centres and long-leased essential retail offer income profiles that residential property in most capital city markets cannot currently match: longer lease terms, tenants covering outgoings, and greater predictability than the residential tenancy cycle.
“The investors who build lasting wealth are rarely the ones who chased yield or growth exclusively,” says Nouh.
“They are the ones who built a strategy they could sustain – one that generated enough income to hold quality assets through multiple cycles while those assets compounded in value.”
The budget has changed the settings. It has not changed the fundamentals.
Australia’s housing market rebounded sharply in 2025, with lower-value suburbs and resource regions driving growth as rate cuts, tight supply and renewed competition reshaped the year.
An opulent Ryde home, packed with cinema, pool, sauna and more, is hitting the auction block with a $1 reserve.
