"This Case Pits Real Lawyers Against a Robot Lawyer"

"Spoiler: the robot wins for lack of Article III standing."

Prof. Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log has the details, about MillerKing, LLC v. DoNotPay, Inc. (S.D. Ill. 2023). An excerpt:

DoNotPay is an online subscription service that touts its ability to allow consumers to "[f]ight corporations, beat bureaucracy and sue anyone at the press of a button" and bills itself as "The World's First Robot Lawyer," offering legal services "related to marriage annulment, speeding ticket appeals, canceling timeshares, breaking leases, breach of contract disputes, defamation demand letters, copyright protection, child support payments, restraining orders, revocable living trusts, and standardized legal documents." But DNP isn't actually licensed to practice law.

MillerKing, a small Chicago law firm that claims to be a direct competitor of DNP, sued DNP for false association and false advertising under the Lanham Act and Illinois state law. Along with state consumer protection claims, MK alleged that DNP was engaged in the unlawful practice of law under Illinois law. (The false association claim was based on the theory that consumers are misled to believe that DNP is affiliated with licensed attorneys and that State bar authorities approve of or sponsor DNP's services.) …

Comments

[John F. Carr]

“[T]he Court will not infer that MK has suffered harm through lost clients just because DNP has gained them.”

[jdgalt1]

Is DNP charging consumers for the service?

[Noscitur a sociis]

A catchy line but a bit misleading, since DoNotPay definitely isn't a lawyer, and almost certainly isn't a robot.

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/01/24/the-worlds-first-robot-lawyer-isnt-a-lawyer-and-im-not-sure-its-even-a-robot/

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

A catchy line but a bit misleading

It's not factually accurate, but it's hardly "misleading" given that as soon as one reads past the headline one is given the facts. It's just a bit of poetic license.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This plaintiff seems to be the wrong plaintiff.

I sense bar associations, and perhaps a district attorney or two, should put DoNotPay out of business without delay or mercy. Whether its proprietor(s) should be charged with crimes in a tougher call.

[Aunt Teefah]

Curiously, it appears that DoNotPay retained the services of flesh-and-blood lawyers (such as they are) at Wilson Sonsini and Paul Hastings to draft and file its motion to dismiss. Never trust a chef who won't eat their own food.

[Squirrelloid]

Nonsense. The man who defends himself has a fool for a client.

[wolfefan]

Kathryn Tewson is involved in another lawsuit against DoNotPay. IANAL but as I understand it the suit is about fraud. If you search for her and for DNP or Josh Browder over on Twitter you'll find her threads about it. She's a paralegal and a delightful follow. She and some of her colleagues regularly conduct litigation disaster tours that are informative and entertaining.