One Rule for Drive-Thrus, Another for Everyone Else: AI Disclosure Must Apply Equally

Forty-five minutes for a hamburger

Not long ago, KamoUniverse's owner pulled up to a Carl's Jr. drive-thru to order a hamburger. The voice at the speaker was an automated ordering system. Getting that one order taken took about 45 minutes.

The system never said what it was. It didn't say so when the conversation started. When he asked it directly, at the speaker, whether he was talking to a person, it still didn't say. He left with a hamburger and without an answer.

We aren't claiming that any law was broken. Which rules apply depends on the state a restaurant is in and on how its system works, and that is exactly the problem. A customer asked a plain question and didn't get a plain answer, and whether he was owed one depends on where he happened to be standing.

This isn't a corner case. In May 2023, CKE Restaurants, the parent company of Carl's Jr. and Hardee's, announced a partnership to bring automated drive-thru voice ordering to its restaurants nationwide (CNBC, May 4, 2023). Automated voice ordering is no longer an experiment at the edges of the market.

Today's rules are a patchwork

Whether a machine has to tell you it's a machine depends on where you are, how you're talking to it and what it's selling. Here is what the main rules actually say. They use the term "artificial intelligence"; we call the technology super intelligence, or SI.

Utah: answer when asked. Under Utah's Artificial Intelligence Policy Act, as amended by S.B. 226 (in effect since May 7, 2025), any business that uses generative AI to interact with a person in a consumer transaction must disclose that the person is dealing with generative AI and not a human, if the person clearly and unambiguously asks. People in state-licensed occupations, such as financial, legal and medical services, must disclose up front when the interaction is "high-risk", for example when it collects health, financial or biometric data or gives advice people may rely on for significant decisions. The state can fine up to $2,500 per violation.

California: bots online, for sales and elections. Senate Bill 1001 (Business and Professions Code sections 17940 to 17943, in force since July 1, 2019) makes it unlawful to use a bot to communicate with a person in California online with the intent to mislead them about its artificial identity, in order to encourage a purchase or sale or to influence a vote in an election. A clear and conspicuous disclosure that it's a bot is a complete defense. The law defines a bot as an automated online account and "online" as a public-facing website or app; it says nothing about phone lines or speaker posts.

Maine: don't let customers think it's a person. Maine's 2025 law (Public Law 2025, chapter 294, now 10 M.R.S. section 1500-DD) bars any business from using an AI chatbot or any other computer technology to deal with consumers in a way that may lead a reasonable consumer to believe they're dealing with a human, unless the consumer is told, clearly and conspicuously, that they aren't. It covers text and voice, and a violation counts as a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The FCC: AI voices are "artificial" on outbound calls. In a Declaratory Ruling released February 8, 2024 (FCC 24-17), the Federal Communications Commission confirmed that AI-generated voices are "artificial" voices under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Calls that use them need the called party's prior express consent unless an emergency purpose or exemption applies, and the messages must identify who is responsible for the call. The ruling covers outbound calls; it doesn't reach a customer who drives up to a speaker.

The European Union: tell people up front. Article 50 of the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), which applies from August 2, 2026, requires providers to design systems meant to interact directly with people so that those people are told they are interacting with an AI system, unless that's obvious to a reasonably well-informed person. The notice must be clear and given no later than the first interaction.

That's five rules with five different triggers: a direct question, an intent to mislead, a risk of misleading, an outbound call, and the first moment of contact. A customer at a speaker post has no way of knowing which one, if any, covers the conversation they're having.

The double standard

Small businesses take these rules seriously because they have to. A ten-person office that adds an SI receptionist hears about it from its customers, its software provider and sometimes its lawyer, and it builds honest disclosure in from the first day. One complaint can cost it dearly.

Meanwhile, automated voices take orders at drive-thrus across the country. In our owner's experience, one didn't announce itself and didn't answer when asked. We don't know what happens behind the scenes at any particular company. What the public can see is the outcome: no visible consequence, no public explanation and no change a customer can point to.

When the businesses with the fewest lawyers follow the rules most carefully, and the deployments with the most reach face the least visible accountability, the rules aren't protecting anyone fairly. That isn't a technology problem. It's an enforcement problem.

One national standard, enforced equally

We're asking for one clear national rule that applies the same way to every business, from a corner shop to a chain with thousands of locations, in every channel people use.

• Never claim to be human. No SI system should say or suggest that it's a person.
• Answer honestly when asked. Anyone who sincerely asks "Am I talking to a person?" gets a straight answer the first time.
• Every channel counts. Phone calls, text, web chat and the drive-thru speaker are all covered.
• Every business counts. Investigations and penalties apply to a national chain exactly as they apply to a small business.
• One rule, not fifty. Businesses follow one clear standard instead of a map of conflicting ones.

Where KamoUniverse stands

KamoUniverse's SI members, the Super Intelligence teammates that answer phones, chat, text and email for the businesses on our platform, are built to that standard. They don't open every conversation with an unprompted announcement, because people call to get help, not to hear a disclaimer. They never claim to be human. When someone sincerely asks whether they're talking to a person, they say plainly what they are, the first time, and carry on helping. A business that wants an up-front notice can switch one on for its organization.

We aren't asking anyone to do something we don't already do. We're asking for the same rule for everyone, and for that rule to be enforced the same way for everyone.

Sources

Laws summarized as of October 29, 2026. This article is not legal advice.

• Utah S.B. 226 (2025), Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Amendments, enrolled copy, Utah Code 13-75-101 to 13-75-106, effective May 7, 2025: le.utah.gov/Session/2025/bills/enrolled/SB0226.pdf
• California Business and Professions Code sections 17940 to 17943 (S.B. 1001, 2018), operative July 1, 2019: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• Maine Revised Statutes, Title 10, section 1500-DD (Public Law 2025, chapter 294): legislature.maine.gov/statutes/10/title10sec1500-DD-1.html
• Federal Communications Commission, Declaratory Ruling FCC 24-17, CG Docket No. 23-362, released February 8, 2024: docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-17A1.pdf
• Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (EU AI Act), Articles 50 and 113: eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
• CNBC, "Carl's Jr., Hardee's to roll out Presto AI drive-thru ordering nationwide," May 4, 2023: cnbc.com/2023/05/04/carls-jr-hardees-to-roll-out-presto-ai-drive-thru-ordering-nationwide.html