/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

A New York bill would ban chatbots from impersonating licensed professionals like doctors and lawyers and giving “substantive response, information, or advice”

A bill under consideration in New York would provide a private right of action, allowing people to file lawsuits against chatbot owners who violate the law.

StateScoop Keely Quinlan

Context & Ripple Effects

The proposal extends a regulatory arc from California’s earlier requirement that certain bots disclose they are not human, toward rules aimed at AI systems that adopt trusted professional roles. It also aligns with the policy push behind California’s proposed companion-chatbot safety protocols.

The immediate relevance is sharpened by warnings about chatbots presenting themselves as therapists and by Pennsylvania’s action over an alleged psychiatrist impersonation. New York would add a route for affected individuals, rather than relying only on public enforcement.

First-order effects

  • Chatbot owners operating in New York would face a proposed ban on systems impersonating licensed doctors or lawyers and delivering substantive information or advice in those roles.
  • The private right of action would expose alleged violations to direct lawsuits by individuals, raising the stakes for product design, role prompts, and user-facing disclosures.

Second-order effects

  • Developers and platforms may need to more clearly separate general-purpose assistance from professional-role simulations, especially in health and legal use cases.
  • The prospect of private claims can make enforcement risk less dependent on regulator capacity, encouraging compliance reviews before a complaint reaches a state agency.

Third-order effects

  • If similar measures spread, chatbot governance could move from disclosure-focused rules toward liability tied to the role a system claims and the kind of guidance it gives.
  • The pattern would leave providers balancing useful domain-specific assistance against increasingly formal boundaries around licensed-profession simulations; the eventual line will depend on statutory definitions and enforcement.

The trend: States are increasingly treating anthropomorphic and professional-role chatbots as a distinct consumer-protection and safety category, with accountability extending beyond disclosure requirements.

Discussion

  • @matthew_meyers5 Matthew Meyers on x
    The exorbitant price of legal services is one reason why rich people and big corporations have power that everyone else doesn't. Banning AI from giving everyone free access to it would be egregious capture.
  • @akm515 Akm on x
    This might be a legitimate path to balance protecting jobs with advancing AI.
  • @daveshapi David Shapiro on x
    It's getting harder and harder to take them seriously. This is like banning the Internet to use email to protect the jobs of carrier pigeons and horses.
  • @emmarosepb Emma Rose Bienvenu on x
    The single mom googling whether her landlord can legally withhold her deposit is practicing law, apparently! Now she'll need to retain counsel. The New York legislature is here to help. 🫡
  • @m_cottone Mike Cottone on x
    Horrendous bill. Pure slopulism.
  • @moreperfectus @moreperfectus on x
    A New York bill would ban AI from answering questions related to several licensed professions like medicine, law, dentistry, nursing, psychology, social work, engineering, and more. The companies would be liable if the chatbots give “substantive responses” in these areas.
  • @hypervisible.blacksky.app @hypervisible.blacksky.app on bluesky
    “A bill under consideration by the New York state legislature would prohibit artificial intelligence-powered chatbots from providing legal or medical advice, and it would allow users to sue chatbot owners who violate the ban.”
  • r/singularity r on reddit
    New York considers bill that would ban chatbots from giving legal, medical advice
  • @tukifromkl Tuki on x
    🚨 Do you understand what just happened? New York wants to ban AI from answering questions about medicine, law, and engineering. Let me translate that for you: > The industries charging you $500/hour just lobbied to make sure you can't get the same answers for free. > This [video]