An artificial intelligence, which has been touted as the “world’s first robot lawyer” and provides consultancy services on more than 150 subjects, has been on the agenda of both the USA and the world in recent months. This artificial intelligence, created by a startup called DoNotPay, could not be used due to the warnings of the court as it was preparing to appear in its first court on February 22.
Today, DoNotPay’s artificial intelligence is in court. According to the allegations created last week and submitted to the court, this artificial intelligence is both against the rules of law and publicly deceiving users.
DoNotPay CEO could go to jail for fraud charges
According to court minutes submitted to the court on March 3 and released publicly today, DoNotPay’s CEO, Joshua Browder, touted the artificial intelligence system developed by his company as “the world’s first robot lawyer” and “an alternative and inexpensive solution to lawyers”. allegedly cheating people.
In addition, stating that artificial intelligence is not a physical robot, a lawyer or a law firm, but an artificial intelligence consultancy service, the lawyers accuse the DoNotPay initiative of being “a technology company that manipulates users and acts like a lawyer”.
The documents submitted to the court also include comments made by several citizens who wanted to have their parking tickets removed using DoNotPay’s advisory system, complaining about paying more than double the amount they should have paid to the court because of the advice of artificial intelligence.
Commenting that DoNotPay received more than 90% bad reviews on the internet and social media as “a failed attempt and a large-scale fraud”, the lawyers judged the CEO of the company with the crimes of “fraud by persuasion” and “informatics fraud”, both imprisoning him and imprisoning him. It also wants to prevent such “fake advocacy” attempts.
In addition, the documents submitted to the court allege that there would be no problem if the artificial intelligence were described as a “legal adviser” instead of a lawyer, but that the company deliberately lied to market this software in a manipulative way.
22126
