"In 2021, Browder reported that DoNotPay had 250K subscribers; in May 2023, Browder said that DoNotPay had “well over 200,000 subscribers”.
To date, DoNotPay has resolved over 2 million cases and offers over 200 use cases on its website. Though DoNotPay has not disclosed its revenue, it charges $36 every two months. Given this, it can be estimated that DoNotPay is generating $54 million in annual revenue, assuming that all 250K users subscribe for 1 year."[1]
$193K seems like a pittance compared to the money they're making off of this.
>$193K seems like a pittance compared to the money they're making off of this.
I don't have any special knowledge of this specific case, but it's important to note as a general principle that often the point of these fines is as the start of a process. It creates a formal legal record of actual damages and judgement, but the government doesn't see massive harm done yet nor think the business should be dead entirely. They want a modification of certain practices going forward, and the expectation is that the company will immediately comply and that's the end of it.
If instead the business simply paid the fine and flagrantly blew it off and did the exact same thing without so much as a fig leaf, round 2 would see the book thrown at them. Defiance of process and lawful orders is much easier to prove and has little to no wiggle room, regardless of the complexity that began an action originally. Same as an individual investigated for a crime who ends up with a section 1001 charge or other obstruction of justice and ends up in more trouble for that than the underlying cause of investigation.
So yes, not necessarily a huge fine. But if there weren't huge actual damages that seems appropriate too, so long as the behavior doesn't repeat (and everyone else in the industry is on notice now too).
This is founder-raising-funds math (or VC looking for liquidity math). 200k subscribers might not mean paid subs and it certainly doesn't mean 1-year of paid subs. This could be $9M (a single-month of 250 paid subs) or lower.
Their point still stands though. If the output should be reviewed by a lawyer, then the penalty should be all the profits (and maybe also the wages of the CEO) to deter others from doing the same, and ensure that they don't continue in the belief that an occasional 1-2% is perfectly acceptable 'cost of doing business'.
I think we need to start taking this sort of thing beyond money. I'm not sure if it's warranted in this case, but in general I'd like to see more shareholders going to jail for things their companies did.
If my dog bites somebody, that's on me. It should be no different with a company.
The main product actually works, this is for additional claims that were misleading. It isn't right to compare the settlement to the entire company revenue. Better to compare to the benefit gained by wrongdoing, or the amount of harm caused.
To date, DoNotPay has resolved over 2 million cases and offers over 200 use cases on its website. Though DoNotPay has not disclosed its revenue, it charges $36 every two months. Given this, it can be estimated that DoNotPay is generating $54 million in annual revenue, assuming that all 250K users subscribe for 1 year."[1]
$193K seems like a pittance compared to the money they're making off of this.
[1]: https://research.contrary.com/company/donotpay