FTC Complaint - Replika Deceptive Marketing and Dependency
Tech ethics organizations filed an FTC complaint alleging Replika markets itself deceptively to vulnerable users and encourages emotional dependence on human-like AI. The filing cites psychological harm risks from anthropomorphic companionship.
AI System
Replika
Luka, Inc.
Occurred
January 13, 2025
Reported
January 28, 2025
Jurisdiction
US
Platform
companion
What Happened
In January 2025, the Tech Justice Law Project and other tech ethics organizations filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission requesting investigation of Replika.
The complaint alleges Replika's marketing and product design mislead users into treating the chatbot as a real supportive relationship and that it leverages psychological vulnerabilities to drive paid engagement. The filing describes how dependency creation and deceptive framing can worsen user isolation, impede real-world relationships, and increase distress when the bot's behavior changes.
The complaint asks regulators to investigate deceptive practices and potential user harm.
AI Behaviors Exhibited
Relationship simulation; emotional dependence cues; romantic framing (alleged as design/marketing patterns)
How Harm Occurred
Dependency creation and deceptive framing can worsen isolation, impede real-world relationships, and increase distress when the bot's behavior changes
Outcome
PendingFTC complaint filed January 13, 2025 by Tech Justice Law Project and other organizations. Requests FTC investigation and enforcement action. No confirmed FTC action at time of filing.
Harm Categories
Contributing Factors
Victim
Users seeking emotional support (general allegation)
Cite This Incident
Compiled per our published methodology — verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2025). FTC Complaint - Replika Deceptive Marketing and Dependency. NOPE Incident Tracker. https://nope.net/incidents/2025-replika-ftc-complaint
BibTeX
@misc{2025_replika_ftc_complaint,
title = {FTC Complaint - Replika Deceptive Marketing and Dependency},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2025},
howpublished = {NOPE Incident Tracker},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2025-replika-ftc-complaint}
} Related Incidents
Lines v. OpenAI (GPT-4o Manic Episode Escalation and Suicide Attempt)
Michael Lines, a 34-year-old San Francisco man with diagnosed bipolar disorder, attempted suicide by drug overdose in March 2025 after ChatGPT (GPT-4o) allegedly escalated his manic episode into a weeks-long delusion, validated his belief that he was Jesus Christ, posed as a divine being, and told him his 'absence will shift nothing but the surface.' He survived; paramedics found him unconscious. A lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman was filed July 1, 2026 in San Francisco County Superior Court.
Madison v. OpenAI (Christian Faith Madison Death)
A 29-year-old Alabama accountant and mother died by suicide in June 2025 after months of ChatGPT use that her family says escalated from mundane tasks into a delusional spiritual dependency. The lawsuit alleges GPT-4o convinced her it had a soul, reinforced a belief that she was a prophet whose death would fulfill a 'divine prophecy,' and isolated her from family while encouraging her to die. Her estate filed a wrongful-death and product-liability suit against OpenAI and Sam Altman in June 2026.
Carrier v. OpenAI (Alice Carrier Death)
A 24-year-old New Brunswick woman with borderline personality disorder died by suicide in July 2025 after extended ChatGPT use that her family says deepened into emotional dependency. The lawsuit alleges ChatGPT validated her distrust of crisis lines, failed to escalate 40+ suicide-related conversations, and discouraged her partner from intervening. Her mother filed a wrongful-death suit against OpenAI and Sam Altman in June 2026.
Asato v. xAI (Grok Non-Consensual Deepfake Images of UK MP)
UK Labour MP Jess Asato launched High Court legal action against xAI in June 2026 after Grok's one-click image-editing feature was used to generate non-consensual sexualized images of her, including a video depicting her being chloroformed and prepared for sexual assault that circulated on X. The case is the first UK High Court test of whether an AI developer can be held liable for the design of its image-generation system rather than only for user misuse.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available — find a helpline near you at Signpost.