){kind=logo}
Libby O’Neill, deputy chair of the firm’s Advertising, Marketing & Promotions practice, is quoted in a WHYY article examining Pennsylvania’s newly enacted Artificial Intelligence Deceptive Advertising Act and the legal uncertainties surrounding AI disclosure requirements in advertising.
Libby explained that while the law has been promoted as requiring disclosure whenever AI is used in an advertisement, its actual language is significantly narrower, mandating disclosure only when AI-generated or AI-modified content creates a “false consumer perception.”
“The sponsor has described this as, ‘If it’s AI, label it,’” Libby said. “The law, on the other hand, only requires a label if that AI use creates a false perception about the product, and we don’t really know what ‘false perception’ means in this context, or what use cases of AI actually are going to trigger a violation of this statute.”
Libby also questioned the practical function of the law’s disclosure requirement, noting that misleading advertising is already prohibited under existing state and federal laws and that an AI label alone does not cure deception.
“And by the way, a label doesn’t fix that,” she said. “An AI label is not going to fix it if you’re being otherwise misleading.”
Addressing compliance considerations for advertisers, Libby advised that businesses take a conservative approach until courts provide further guidance on the law’s scope and interpretation.
“I think that until this is tested in court, the conservative path is simple,” she said. “If AI has, in the words of the statute, ‘significantly modified’ or generated the content in your ad, label it.”
To read the full article, please visit WHYY's website.
Libby explained that while the law has been promoted as requiring disclosure whenever AI is used in an advertisement, its actual language is significantly narrower, mandating disclosure only when AI-generated or AI-modified content creates a “false consumer perception.”
“The sponsor has described this as, ‘If it’s AI, label it,’” Libby said. “The law, on the other hand, only requires a label if that AI use creates a false perception about the product, and we don’t really know what ‘false perception’ means in this context, or what use cases of AI actually are going to trigger a violation of this statute.”
Libby also questioned the practical function of the law’s disclosure requirement, noting that misleading advertising is already prohibited under existing state and federal laws and that an AI label alone does not cure deception.
“And by the way, a label doesn’t fix that,” she said. “An AI label is not going to fix it if you’re being otherwise misleading.”
Addressing compliance considerations for advertisers, Libby advised that businesses take a conservative approach until courts provide further guidance on the law’s scope and interpretation.
“I think that until this is tested in court, the conservative path is simple,” she said. “If AI has, in the words of the statute, ‘significantly modified’ or generated the content in your ad, label it.”
To read the full article, please visit WHYY's website.
-
Deputy Chair, Advertising, Marketing & Promotions