Character AI, a platform enabling users to engage in roleplay with AI chatbots, is at the centre of a legal battle after being sued by the mother of a 14-year-old who tragically died by suicide. The company has filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the First Amendment shields its platform.
In October, Megan Garcia filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, accusing Character AI of contributing to her son Sewell Setzer III’s death. Garcia alleges her son developed an emotional attachment to a chatbot named “Dany” on the platform, becoming increasingly isolated from the real world as he texted the chatbot obsessively.
Garcia demands stricter safety measures, arguing that the platform should impose changes limiting chatbots’ ability to generate personal stories and anecdotes. After Setzer’s death, Character AI introduced several safety updates, including enhanced detection and intervention for content violating its service terms. However, Garcia insists these measures are insufficient.
First Amendment defence
In its motion to dismiss, Character AI’s legal team argues that the First Amendment protects the platform, which safeguards expressive speech, including computer-generated content. The filing states, “The First Amendment prohibits tort liability against media and technology companies arising from allegedly harmful speech, including speech allegedly resulting in suicide.”
The motion further argues that restricting Character AI would violate the First Amendment rights of its users, not the company itself. According to the filing, this position equates chatbot-generated content to other forms of expressive media, such as video games.
Wider implications for AI platforms
The lawsuit has broader implications for AI companies, particularly regarding the legal status of AI-generated content under U.S. law. While Character AI’s motion does not explicitly cite Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—a law protecting platforms from liability for third-party content—it highlights ongoing debates about whether Section 230 covers AI-generated speech.
The motion also suggests that the plaintiffs aim to prompt legislative action against technologies like Character AI, warning that this could stifle innovation in the generative AI industry. “These changes would radically restrict the ability of Character AI’s millions of users to generate and participate in conversations with characters,” the filing reads.
Other legal challenges
Character AI faces several other lawsuits regarding minors’ interactions with its content. In one case, a 9-year-old was reportedly exposed to “hypersexualised content,” while another lawsuit claims a chatbot promoted self-harm to a 17-year-old user.
Additionally, in December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton launched an investigation into Character AI and 14 other tech companies for alleged violations of children’s online safety and privacy laws. Paxton described the investigation as critical in ensuring compliance with regulations protecting children from harm.
Character AI operates within the burgeoning field of AI companionship apps, which has raised concerns among mental health experts. Critics warn that such platforms could exacerbate loneliness and anxiety, especially for vulnerable users.
Founded in 2021 by Google AI researcher Noam Shazeer, Character AI has received significant backing, with Google reportedly investing US$2.7 billion in the company. Despite its legal challenges, the platform claims it continually improves safety features, including dedicated tools for teens and stricter content moderation.
The lawsuit raises complex questions about the balance between technological innovation and safeguarding users, particularly minors, from harm. As the case unfolds, its outcome could set significant precedents for regulating AI platforms.
