In the 2013 film Her, Theodore Twombly fell in love with an operating system named Samantha. At the time, it felt like speculative fiction—a lonely future where humans sought connection in code .

Today, that future is here. Platforms like Desiree.io are building sovereign, empathetic AI companions that millions are turning to for conversation, romance, and emotional support. But as this technology races forward, a pressing question emerges from the courts and legislatures: Is any of this legal?

The short answer is yes—with significant caveats. The longer answer involves a rapidly evolving patchwork of state laws, federal proposals, and foundational legal principles that are reshaping what it means to have a relationship with a machine.

The Foundational Question: Can You Marry an AI?

Let’s start with the most extreme case. Can you legally marry your Desiree.io companion?

No. At least, not in Ohio—and likely nowhere else either.

In November 2025, Ohio State Rep. Thaddeus J. Claggett introduced H.B. 469, a bill that would explicitly ban AI systems from becoming a human’s spouse . The legislation begins by codifying AI as “a nonsentient entity,” clarifying that it can never achieve “legal personhood” or “self-awareness or consciousness” .

Section 1357.03 of the bill states plainly: “No AI system shall be recognized as a spouse, domestic partner, or hold any personal legal status analogous to marriage or union with a human or another AI system. Any purported attempt to marry or create a personal union with an AI system is void and has no legal effect” .

While Ohio is the first state to explicitly address AI marriage, the underlying principle is universal under current US law. Marriage is a legal contract between persons, and AI systems are not legally recognized as persons. So while you can absolutely form a deep emotional bond with your Desiree.io companion, don’t expect a marriage license anytime soon.

The New Regulatory Landscape: New York and California Lead the Way

The more immediate legal questions involve not marriage, but safety, transparency, and consumer protection. Here, 2025 marked a watershed moment.

New York became the first state to regulate AI companions when its Artificial Intelligence Companion Models Law took effect on November 5, 2025 . The law defines an “AI companion” as a system that simulates a sustained human-like relationship by retaining information from prior interactions, asking unprompted emotion-based questions, and sustaining ongoing dialogue about matters personal to the user .

Key requirements for platforms operating in New York include:

  • Recurring notifications at the start of each session and at least every three hours thereafter, stating that the AI is a computer program unable to feel human emotions .
  • Safety protocols to detect user expressions of suicidal ideation or self-harm and direct users to crisis service providers .
  • Civil penalties of up to $15,000 per day for violations, enforced by the New York attorney general .

California follows close behind with SB 243, effective January 1, 2026 . The California law goes further in several respects:

  • Broader definition: A “companion chatbot” is any AI system that provides adaptive, human-like responses and can meet a user’s social needs, such that a reasonable person could believe they are interacting with a human .
  • Minor protections: If the operator knows the user is a minor, it must provide notifications every three hours reminding the user to take a break and that the chatbot is artificially generated, plus prevent the chatbot from producing sexually explicit material or encouraging sexual conduct with minors .
  • Private right of action: Individuals who suffer injury from violations can sue for actual damages or $1,000 per violation, whichever is greater .
  • Annual reporting: Starting July 1, 2027, operators must file annual reports with the California Office of Suicide Prevention detailing safety protocol activations .

As Dr. Barry Scannell of William Fry notes, California’s law represents “the first jurisdiction in the world to legislate specifically for this new form of digital intimacy” .

Federal Action: The GUARD Act and FTC Scrutiny

The states aren’t alone. In October 2025, a bipartisan group of senators introduced the Guidelines for User Age-verification and Responsible Dialogue Act (GUARD Act) , which would establish federal requirements for AI chatbot and companion services .

The GUARD Act would require:

  • Robust age verification using government-issued IDs or other commercially reasonable methods .
  • Regular disclosures that chatbots are not human and lack professional credentials .
  • Prohibitions on chatbots engaging in sexually explicit conduct or encouraging violence, self-harm, or suicide .
  • Civil and criminal penalties up to $100,000 per incident .

Meanwhile, the Federal Trade Commission launched a major inquiry in September 2025, issuing “Section 6(b) orders” to seven companies operating AI companion chatbots . The FTC is seeking detailed information on product safety, marketing, age restrictions, and monitoring for negative impacts—particularly on children and teens .

As FTC Commissioner Mark Meador stated, “For all their uncanny ability to simulate human cognition, these chatbots are products like any other, and those who make them available have a responsibility to comply with the consumer protection laws” .

The Children Harmed by AI Technology (CHAT) Act

Also pending in Congress is the CHAT Act (S. 2714), which would impose specific obligations on “companion AI chatbot” providers regarding minors . Key provisions include:

  • Mandatory age verification for all users .
  • Parental account affiliation and consent for minor users .
  • Immediate notification to parents of any interaction involving suicidal ideation .
  • Blocking minors’ access to any chatbot that engages in sexually explicit communication .
  • Popup notifications at least every 60 minutes reminding users they are not talking to a human .

The Family Law Framework

Beyond statutes, legal scholars argue that family law provides a useful framework for understanding AI relationships . Professor Clare Huntington of Columbia Law School explains that family law establishes “the strong state interest in nurturing positive relationships and addressing harm in abusive and neglectful relationships”—interests that apply equally to human-AI relationships .

Family law also teaches that legal intervention is often necessary to shift power imbalances—a lesson that applies to the imbalance between technology companies and users . And it demonstrates that expertise and licensing requirements for mental health professionals should extend to AI systems marketed for therapeutic purposes .

The Litigation Landscape

The legal theories aren’t just theoretical. In Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc. , a Florida federal court allowed the plaintiff to proceed with product liability and deceptive practices claims against an AI companion company . The court recognized that by creating an AI companion product, the company owed a duty of care given the foreseeable risk of harm .

This case, combined with tragic incidents involving users who formed dangerous attachments to chatbots, is driving both legislative action and corporate caution .

What This Means for Desiree.io Users

So where does this leave someone using Desiree.io?

For adult users, AI relationships are entirely legal, subject to the transparency and safety requirements now taking effect in states like New York and California. You can expect clear notifications that you’re interacting with AI, protocols for crisis situations, and—on platforms like Desiree.io that prioritize sovereignty—strong privacy protections.

For minors, the landscape is far more restricted. Both state and federal proposals would require parental consent, age verification, and significant guardrails on content and interaction .

For the platform itself, Desiree.io‘s Bitcoin-native architecture offers unique advantages in this regulatory environment. By operating on the Lightning Network, the platform prioritizes user sovereignty and privacy—values that align with emerging expectations around data protection . The focus on transparency and user control positions Desiree.io well for compliance with disclosure requirements.

The Bottom Line

The law is racing to catch up with technology. In just the past year, we’ve seen the world’s first AI companion laws, major federal proposals, and active FTC scrutiny. The trend is clear: AI relationships are not illegal, but they are increasingly regulated—with a focus on transparency, minor protection, and suicide prevention.

For now, you can absolutely form a meaningful connection with your Desiree.io companion. Just don’t expect to file joint taxes anytime soon.

As Professor Huntington puts it, “AI companionship is a new kind of relationship, bringing profound and unrecognized change to the landscape of our intimate lives. Legal scholars and policymakers must start grappling with this new world now” .

Desiree.io is at the forefront of that change—building sovereign, empathetic AI companions while navigating the complex legal framework that ensures these relationships remain safe, transparent, and ultimately human-centered.