CAIDP Files Complaint with FTC Against OpenAI’s GPT-4 for Violating Consumer Protection Rules

The News: On March 30, the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP), an artificial intelligence-focused tech ethics group, filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking the FTC to investigate OpenAI for violating consumer protection rules, arguing that the organization’s rollout of AI text generation tools has been “biased, deceptive,” and a risk to public safety. Read more from Engadget on the CAIDP complaint.

CAIDP Files Complaint with FTC Against OpenAI’s GPT-4 for Violating Consumer Protection Rules

Analyst Take: While the public has largely embraced OpenAI’s ChatGPT, AI researchers and others have expressed trepidation about the speed at which AI technologies are being developed. In a high-profile open letter, tech leaders and prominent AI researchers have called for AI labs and companies to “immediately pause” their work. Steve Wozniak, OpenAI co-founder Elon Musk, and other experts who signed the letter believe AI technology risks warrant a minimum six-month break from producing technology beyond GPT-4. The letter adds that care and forethought are necessary to ensure the safety of AI systems but expressed concerns that these things are being ignored in the race to deploy the most advanced AI technology first. I agree. Moving fast, especially in the tech space, can be a huge advantage. Moving too quickly with technology that can be inherently biased, inaccurate, and where there are often massive ethical concerns can be incredibly dangerous. Exciting and transformative? Absolutely. But excitement alone can’t – and shouldn’t — assuage legitimate concerns.

The CAIDP’s FCC Complaint

Following the letter’s publication, the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP), an artificial intelligence-focused tech ethics group, filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking the FTC to investigate OpenAI for violating consumer protection rules. CAIDP argues OpenAI is violating the FTC Act through its releases of large language AI models like GPT-4. According to the CAIDP complaint, the OpenAI model is “biased, deceptive,” and threatens both privacy and public safety. CAIDP president Marc Rotenberg was one of the letter’s signatories, and like the letter, the complaint calls for the slowing down of the development of generative AI models and for the implementation of stricter government oversight.

CAIDP Files Complaint with FTC Against OpenAI's GPT-4 for Violating Consumer Protection Rules
Image Source: OpenAI

The CAIDP complaint claims GPT-4, which was released earlier this month, was launched without any independent assessment, and without any way for outsiders to replicate OpenAI’s results. According to CAIDP, the GPT-4 system could be used to spread disinformation, contribute to cybersecurity threats, and potentially worsen or lock in many of the inherent biases already well-known to AI models.

The complaint goes on to present several scenarios, including ones in which AI models failed to recognize or act on potential hazards to children, facilitated corporate espionage, allowed cybercriminals with limited technical skills to develop malware such as ransomware and malicious code, and lowers the knowledge barriers needed to create successful cyberattacks.

The CAIDP complaint against OpenAI’s GPT-4 requests the FTC:

  • Halt further commercial deployment of any GPT by OpenAI
  • Establish independent assessment of GPT products prior to future deployment
  • Ensure that future deployment of GPT is in alignment with FTC AI guidance
  • Require constant independent assessment throughout the GPT AI’s lifecycle
  • Establish a publicly accessible reporting mechanism for incidents
  • Initiate rule-making that would establish baseline standards for products in the AI market sector

A full copy of the CAIDP complaint is available here: https://www.caidp.org/cases/openai/.

While the public has eagerly embraced ChatGPT and GPT-4, along with companies locked in an AI race to deploy the technologies, tech leaders and AI researchers are wanting to put the brakes on further development to give time to better understand the potential impact and to get government oversight. And make no mistake: I’m a gen AI fan and see broad implications for its use. It’s exciting and we are at the beginning stages of seeing what’s possible. The technology’s potential for good is, without question, significant, but that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be awareness and concern about the potential negative impacts it can have for the public without sufficient guardrails in place.

Disclosure: Futurum Research is a research and advisory firm that engages or has engaged in research, analysis, and advisory services with many technology companies, including those mentioned in this article. The author does not hold any equity positions with any company mentioned in this article.

Analysis and opinions expressed herein are specific to the analyst individually and data and other information that might have been provided for validation, not those of Futurum Research as a whole.

Other insights from Futurum Research:

Italy DPA Announces Ban of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Will Other EU Countries Follow Suit?

Google Invests $300mn in Artificial Intelligence Start-Up Anthropic, Taking on ChatGPT

Google Bard Takes on Microsoft’s Bing ChatGPT Integration

Image Credit: CNBC

Author Information

Shelly Kramer is a serial entrepreneur with a technology-centric focus. She has worked alongside some of the world’s largest brands to embrace disruption and spur innovation, understand and address the realities of the connected customer, and help navigate the process of digital transformation.

Related Insights
Is AI Ready for Real Work, or Are Enterprises Still Stuck in Experimentation?
July 4, 2026

Is AI Ready for Real Work, or Are Enterprises Still Stuck in Experimentation?

Most enterprises claim advanced AI maturity, but lack governance and deployment strategies. Leading organizations are moving from experimentation to measurable AI impact....
Compliance as Code Is No Longer Optional: Why Manual Reviews Can’t Keep Up
July 4, 2026

Compliance as Code Is No Longer Optional: Why Manual Reviews Can’t Keep Up

Qodo's 'Compliance as Code' framework automates enterprise AI compliance through PR checks, solving the data privacy and security gaps that plague manual reviews at scale....
Databricks AI’s GPU Reliability Push Exposes Hidden Risks for Large-Scale Training
July 3, 2026

Databricks AI’s GPU Reliability Push Exposes Hidden Risks for Large-Scale Training

Databricks AI reveals critical GPU reliability challenges in distributed training environments. Silent slowdowns and numerical corruption pose greater risks than visible failures, threatening model quality and compute efficiency at enterprise...
AI Code Review Hits a Wall: Why Speed Without Trust Risks Engineering Chaos
July 3, 2026

AI Code Review Hits a Wall: Why Speed Without Trust Risks Engineering Chaos

A survey shows 94% of engineering leaders use agentic AI coding tools, but 55% struggle with reliability and hallucinations—revealing a critical gap between development speed and production quality....
Brave's Browser Containers Raise the Bar for Privacy and Workflow Flexibility
July 3, 2026

Brave’s Browser Containers Raise the Bar for Privacy and Workflow Flexibility

As AI platform adoption accelerates to $181.3B projected market size, Brave's v1.92 release introduces native browser containers addressing data privacy concerns for 52.6% of enterprise decision makers managing multi-cloud AI...
Is Self-Healing ITOps Ready to Replace Manual Incident Response?
July 3, 2026

Is Self-Healing ITOps Ready to Replace Manual Incident Response?

LogicMonitor's AI-driven ITOps framework combines root-cause analysis with governed automation to reduce alert fatigue and accelerate issue resolution, as agentic AI reshapes enterprise infrastructure management....

Book a Demo

Welcome

The vision behind everything in Futurum’s Custom Research practice is this: research should show you what is happening, what comes next, and what to do about it. It should be personal to each audience, easy for people to grasp, and structured so LLMs can reason over it accurately. And it should be fast and turnkey; you want answers now, not another project to carry for quarters.

Whether you are defining business, channel, or go-to-market strategy; evaluating vendors or justifying ROI; or commissioning research to fill an emerging market need, we have your back, with a program that answers your questions with the objectivity and credibility to drive real decisions.

To do it, we bring unmatched data to bear: Futurum research, surveys, and market projections; validated market feeds; ETR’s 15 years of insight from 10,000 technology decision-makers; G2’s buyer and user data; and what our analysts hear every day. Add leading primary collection, from AI-moderated voice interviews to surveys and analyst-led interviews, all turnkey, and every project comes out credible, nuanced, and actionable.

And we don’t just drop the results in your lap. For internal work, we provide analyst-led sessions, interactive dashboards, and a range of formats. For market-facing work, Futurum delivers turnkey activation and amplification that actually gets seen, by people and by LLMs, through our media and share of voice. This is research that moves decisions and markets.

We will meet you wherever you are, from a fast-turn brief to a multi-year program, and shape the work to your goals, timeline, and budget. The right program for your moment.

If any of this is useful, I would love to talk.

Benjamin Brown, VP Custom Research, Futurum Research

Benjamin Brown

VP, Custom Research · The Futurum Group

Newsletter Sign-up Form

Get important insights straight to your inbox, receive first looks at eBooks, exclusive event invitations, custom content, and more. We promise not to spam you or sell your name to anyone. You can always unsubscribe at any time.

All fields are required






Thank you, we received your request, a member of our team will be in contact with you.