THIS IS WHY YOU CAN’T TRUST GenAI: GoogleAI Follows Errant Law Firm Posts Falsely Suggesting FCC’s TCPA “Reasonable Means” Revocation Rule Was Stayed (It Wasn’t)

2 Comments

Not long ago I was at a conference and someone asked whether Troutman Amin, LLP’s legal advice was “better than ChatGPT’s.”

I nearly fell over.

He assured me he was kidding but it really got me thinking about the phenomenon of small business owners trying to ChatGPT their way out of hiring counsel. What a terrible mistake.

Apropos.

Over the weekend I was startled by LinkedIn posts suggesting the FCC’s “reasonable means” revocation ruling had been stayed for a year.

Ummmm… no.

The truth is only the insane scope provisions of the new rule had been stayed– not the full “reasonable means” provisions. Indeed those have been in effect for two solid weeks now.

WOAH!!!!!: FCC Issues Stay of Worst Parts of TCPA Revocation Ruling (And TCPAWorld is Saved– Again)

Apparently some law firms had COMPLETELY misread the FCC’s order staying the revocation ruling and were pumping out content suggesting the entire amendment to 64.1200 was stayed when the Commission was CRYSTAL CLEAR that was not the case.

Just an insane mistake and the law firms have since fixed it (but it really goes to show why you can’t just take TCPA advice from any old law firm.)

TODAY IS THE DAY: New TCPA Revocation Rule Goes Into Effect– This is What YOU Need to Know Right Now

But because so many law firms had gotten it wrong– again heed the lesson– Google’s own AI product began parroting and disseminating the incorrect information.

It says the “stay applies to the ‘reasonable method’ provision, delaying its effective date until April 11, 2026.” Took a screenshot for you all to prove it:

Absolutely NUTS.

Any business relying on Google search results for TCPA advice are obviously knowingly cutting corners but still, this is DEAD WRONG and a failure to properly comply with the FCC TCPA revocation ruling could destroy a business rapidly considering each illegal call will cost a business $500.00-$1,500.00.

And where a business wholly fails to heed a new rule with a proper policy–because, for instance, they could wait a year to implement– that creates class action risk and $500.00 becomes $500,000,000.00 in exposure very quickly.

DO NOT let that happen to you.

Ditch the reliance on GenAI– and lesser law firms for that matter– and make sure you’re getting your TCPA news directly from TCPAWorld.com and your TCPA advice from Troutman Amin, LLP.

Period. Full stop. The end.

The risks are just too high folks.

Want to find out about us? Be sure to request a FREE copy of the Troutman Amin, LLP TCPA Annual Review (2025 Ed.) presented by Contact Center Compliance.

WE DID IT!: WE UPDATED OUT 2025 TCPA ANNUAL REVIEW AND YOU SIMPLY MUST HAVE ONE RIGHT NOW!

Have a good weekend!

Discover more from TCPAWorld

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories:

Published by Eric "Czar" Troutman

The Czar of TCPAWorld Eric Troutman is one of the country’s prominent class action defense lawyers and is nationally recognized in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation and compliance. He has served as lead defense counsel in more than 70 national TCPA class actions and has litigated nearly a thousand individual TCPA cases in his role as national strategic litigation counsel for major banks and finance companies. He also helps industry participants build TCPA-compliant processes, policies, and systems. Eric has built a national litigation practice based upon deep experience, rigorous analysis and extraordinary responsiveness. Eric and his team feel equally at home litigating multibillion dollar telecommunications class actions in federal court as they do developing and executing national litigation strategies for institutions facing an onslaught of individual TCPA matters. They thrive in each of these roles – delivering consistently excellent results – while never losing sight of the client experience. While many firms now tout TCPA expertise, Eric has been there from the beginning. He built one of the country’s first TCPA-only defense teams and began serving as national TCPA counsel for his clients nearly a decade ago. This perspective allows him to swiftly develop the right litigation strategies for dealing with recurring problems, without wasting time on tactics that are bound to fail. Eric’s rich historical perspective and encyclopedic knowledge of the TCPA landscape also make him an invaluable resource to institutional compliance teams struggling to comply with the shifting regulatory landscape. No task is too small – or too big. Indeed, Eric and his team have helped build TCPA-compliant systems and processes for some of the largest and most complex corporate entities in the country. He commonly works with in-house compliance counsel to build and implement enterprise and business-line specific TCPA solutions, performs TCPA audits and drafts and reviews proposed TCPA policies and procedures. He and his team also have the technical expertise necessary to assist call centers seeking to develop TCPA-resistant call path architecture or to modify existing telephony and software integration to better insulate from potential TCPA exposure. Eric has built a reputation for thought leadership. An avid blogger and speaker, he has been at the forefront of the industry’s effort to push for clarity and a return to sanity for the TCPA for years. He was selected to advocate for the financial services industry on important TCPA issues before the Federal Communications Commission and co-authored the nation’s only comprehensive practice guide on TCPA defense. In his spare time, Eric leads defense teams representing banks and other financial services companies in consumer finance litigation matters. He has experience representing clients in UCC, TILA, RESPA FCRA, CCRA, CLRA, FDCPA, RFDCPA and FCCPA claims, as well as in fraud and bank operations issues.

2 Comments

  1. Another cautionary AI tale…Morgan & Morgan (America’s Largest Personal Injury Law Firm. 1000+ Lawyers) got busted for using AI that cited non-existent cases.

    Sheesh, with that many attys one might think they’d have the resources to cite ACTUAL case law. Or at least spare someone vet the crap that AI is spitting out…which is actually required as
    attorney ethics rules require lawyers to vet and stand by their court filings or risk being disciplined.

    AI ‘hallucinations’ in court papers spell trouble for lawyers

    “Feb 18, 2025 (Reuters) – U.S. personal injury law firm Morgan & Morgan sent an urgent email, this month to its more than 1,000 lawyers: Artificial intelligence can invent fake case law, and using made-up information in a court filing could get you fired.”

    “A federal judge in Wyoming had just threatened to sanction two lawyers at the firm who included fictitious case citations in a lawsuit against Walmart (WMT.N). One of the lawyers admitted in court filings last week that he used an AI program that “hallucinated” the cases and apologized for what he called an inadvertent mistake.”

    “AI’s penchant for generating legal fiction in case filings has led courts around the country to question or discipline lawyers in at least seven cases over the last two years, and created a new high-tech headache for litigants and judges, Reuters found.”

    https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/ai-hallucinations-court-papers-spell-trouble-lawyers-2025-02-18/

    From one of the numerous earlier cases:

    “The judge wrote in Thursday’s sanctions order that there is nothing “inherently improper” in lawyers using AI “for assistance,” but he said lawyer ethics rules “impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings.”

    “The judge also said that the lawyers “continued to stand by the fake opinions” after the court and the airline questioned whether they existed. His order also said the lawyers must notify the judges, all of them real, who were identified as authors of the fake cases of the sanction.”

    https://www.reuters.com/legal/new-york-lawyers-sanctioned-using-fake-chatgpt-cases-legal-brief-2023-06-22/

    Reply

  2. Defendants in Telephone Consumer Protection Act cases who directed illegal telemarketing calls to the (318) area code should absolutely rely on ChatGpt rather than competent defense counsel. Just my opinion- I’m not a lawyer.
    Clinton from Louisiana

    Reply

Leave a Reply