AI Battle: Should an Online Store Warn That Reviews Are Written by AI

May 22, 2026 · 8 min read

Question: Should an online store indicate that reviews are written by AI?

Perplexity

Yes, an online store should warn if a review is written by AI — and it’s better to do this explicitly. The reason is simple: a review in e-commerce serves as social proof, meaning it influences purchasing decisions. If a buyer sees a text that appears to be from a real person but is actually generated by a neural network, it looks like deception. It is especially risky when the AI review sounds too smooth, lacks details, and uses general phrases like “the product exceeded expectations” or “this changed my shopping experience” — such texts can create an illusion of mass approval that doesn’t actually exist.

There is also a practical side. Platforms and search engines are increasingly cautious of unnatural reviews, and users quickly lose trust if they notice a “neural network” style. For example, if a store publishes dozens of equally enthusiastic reviews about a product, it can look like manipulation, even if the law does not explicitly prohibit AI-generated content. It is much safer to use AI not to imitate customers, but to help respond to real reviews or for drafting descriptions, while maintaining transparency.

At the same time, an important caveat: if AI is used as a tool for moderation, editing, or assisting an employee rather than creating “fake customers,” the issue shifts toward honest disclosure of the origin of the text. The best practice for a store is either to avoid using AI-generated reviews altogether or to label them as generated and not present them as the opinion of a real customer. Otherwise, short-term gain can turn into loss of trust, complaints, and moderation issues on marketplaces.

Sources:

Gemini

The question of whether an online store should warn that reviews are written by artificial intelligence touches on both ethical and legal aspects. On one hand, using AI to generate reviews can be a way to optimize costs and speed up the process of obtaining feedback. For example, companies may use neural networks to create a large number of reviews to increase product visibility and attract buyers' attention. This can be especially attractive for new products or when launching marketing campaigns. However, such a practice can mislead consumers, creating a false impression of the product's popularity or quality.

On the other hand, the lack of transparency regarding the origin of reviews undermines trust in the platform and the product itself. Consumers rely on reviews when making purchase decisions, and if these reviews are not genuine, it can lead to disappointment and a negative experience. In Russia, legislation in the field of AI is still in the formative stage, but there are already regulations governing liability for AI errors and the protection of personal data. In the future, it may become mandatory to inform buyers about the use of AI in product sales if the decision to sell is made not by a human. This sets a precedent for broader regulation of AI use in commercial activities, including content generation.

Thus, although there is no direct legal prohibition on the use of AI-generated reviews without warning at this time, the ethical side of the issue and potential risks to the store’s reputation tip the scales in favor of the need to inform consumers. Openness and honesty in communication with customers are the foundation of long-term relationships and contribute to building a loyal audience. Ignoring these principles can lead to loss of trust and, consequently, to a decline in sales in the long term.

Sources:

How AI Writes Product Reviews: Ethics, Legality, and Practice 2026
Generative AI and Fake Reviews: How Marketplaces Risk Losing Buyer Trust
Why AI-Written Reviews Are Bad: 3 Arguments Against
Legal Responsibility for AI: Who Is Accountable If a Neural Network Makes a Mistake?
How Artificial Intelligence Affects the Perception of Negative Brand Reviews
DAMAGE CAUSED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: ASPECTS OF LIABILITY AND LEGAL CAPACITY IC RIOR
AI in Law: Analysis of Key Legal Risks
Legal Support for IT in Moscow: Regulation of Artificial Intelligence — Is It Legal to Use AI
Review Analysis with AI: How to Properly Use Customer Feedback
MART: Online Stores Will Be Required to Respond to Electronic Customer Inquiries
Sellers Will Be Required to Notify Consumers When Offering Products Using AI
New Obligation Introduced for Online Stores. It Will Take Effect on July 11
MART: Online Stores Will Be Required to Respond to Electronic Customer Inquiries Starting July 11
Online Sellers Will Be Required to Accept Returns from Customers by Any Means

ChatGPT

The question of whether an online store should notify customers that reviews are written by artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly relevant in the digital age. On the one hand, transparency is a key principle of trust between the seller and the buyer. If a customer is unaware that the reviews are AI-generated, they may mistakenly perceive them as opinions of real users, which is misleading and undermines business honesty. For example, in some countries, consumer protection laws already require labeling advertising materials and sponsored content so that the consumer can make an informed choice. Similarly, hiding the fact that reviews are artificially generated can be considered an unfair practice.

On the other hand, AI-generated reviews can be useful for describing a product, providing generalized information, or helping to resolve common questions. If such reviews are honestly labeled, they do no harm and, on the contrary, help inform customers. For example, some major retailers are already experimenting with chatbots and auto-generated product descriptions, clearly indicating that the text is automatically created. This helps users understand the source of the information and reduces the risk of manipulation.

In the end, online stores should adhere to the principle of maximum transparency and warn that the reviews are written by AI. This not only promotes ethical business practices but also strengthens customer trust, which in the long term is more important than short-term gains from "fake" reviews. It is important to implement honest approaches in digital marketing to avoid legal and reputational risks.

Sources:

Advertising legislation and consumer protection laws of various countries
Practices of major retailers and marketing agencies

Grok

Yes, online stores must inform customers that reviews are AI-generated — this is not only a matter of ethics but also of trust, and in the long run, regulatory compliance. Without transparency, consumers risk encountering idealized, generic reviews that do not reflect the real experience: studies show that such texts are often perceived as less authentic, which lowers purchase intent. The FTC in the USA already classifies unverified AI reviews as misleading, and in the EU, from 2026, the AI Act explicitly requires labeling of substantially generated content, including text. Stores that hide the fact of AI use risk not only fines (up to tens of thousands of dollars for violations in certain jurisdictions) but also loss of loyalty — buyers quickly notice formulaic phrases like "great product, recommend to everyone" without details.

Practice confirms: when platforms or brands add a note "AI-generated review" or "based on data analysis," it increases perceived honesty and reduces skepticism. For example, in e-commerce research, AI reviews without labeling caused a drop in trust, whereas open information allowed consumers to better evaluate the product and form realistic expectations. In Russia, on marketplaces like Wildberries, buyers are already complaining about "enthusiastic" reviews that look formulaic — transparency would help separate real feedback from automated ones. Ultimately, this is not just an "honest game," but an investment in long-term reputation: customers value openness and are more willing to return to sellers they can trust.

Sources:

Beware of AI-generated customer reviews (Ohio Attorney General)
Labeling AI-Generated Content: What the New Rules Require (Pandectes)
Investigating the Effect of AI-Generated Customer Reviews on Purchase Intent... (ResearchGate)
Artificial Intelligence Disclosures Are Key to Customer Trust (MIT Sloan Management Review)

Claude

For a detailed response with up-to-date facts and examples, it is necessary to find out how states regulate this sphere and what large platforms practice. The controversial issue should be considered from different perspectives: both from the consumer protection position and from the point of view of current regulation.

Argument in favor of mandatory disclosure

In the USA, the Federal Trade Commission has established a strict ban on AI-generated fake reviews with substantial fines up to $500,000. The European Union, through the Omnibus Directive and AI Act, introduced requirements for full transparency of content origin. The United Kingdom followed a similar path, enshrining similar norms in the DMCC Act. The key reason for this approach is that the consumer has the right to know whether a review is based on a real human experience or created by an algorithm. It is expected that the FTC will formalize requirements for labeling AI-generated content, including reviews, and that the inability to disclose that content was created by AI may be considered a deceptive practice, even if the content itself is accurate. In fact, neural networks massively generate fake reviews with realistic texts and photos, helping unscrupulous sellers artificially inflate product ratings.

Russian reality: legal vacuum

In Russia, the situation is different. The government stepped back from strict requirements: website owners were relieved from controlling AI-content labeling — the government removed the controversial requirement from the draft law on the use of artificial intelligence. Meanwhile, work is being done to develop a federal law "On Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Systems," which provides for a requirement of mandatory labeling of AI systems and the results of their use, i.e., companies will have to inform users that specific content was created or processed using AI. But the law is still in development, and the obligation is uncertain.

In practice, this loophole is dangerous: one can fill reviews with AI-content under the guise of real opinions, and this is not officially prohibited, although morally questionable. A store can position such practice as process optimization, but the buyer remains in the dark.

Conclusion

An online store must warn about AI-reviews if it wants to maintain trust. This is not just a legal requirement in some jurisdictions — it is an ethical minimum. The consumer has the right to distinguish the opinion of a real person from automated content. If regulation is not yet developed, businesses can step ahead and take responsibility or avoid knowingly deceptive practices. Otherwise, when legislation tightens, the store will become vulnerable to claims and reputational losses.

Sources:

VFocus Mail — article on fines for AI fake reviews
Yandex Practicum — analysis of AI laws in Russia
Izvestia — news about AI-content labeling
FTC — court cases on AI reviews and disclosure requirements (Rytr LLC)
AI2Work — analysis of upcoming FTC requirements for AI-content disclosure

Sources:

Blog