About this service
Algorithms now decide which price a consumer sees, which offer appears first on the screen, how many steps it takes to cancel an order and which information stays below the fold. Georgian law has no separate statute for algorithms — the governing framework is consumer-protection legislation: the prohibition of unfair commercial practices and its manifestations, namely misleading commercial practices by action and by omission, and aggressive commercial practices. It is under these norms that a manipulative interface is assessed: where an algorithmic decision pushes a consumer into a transaction they would not have concluded with full information, this is already a legal problem, not merely a design question. This service is intended both for consumers who have become victims of manipulation and for businesses that want their digital services checked for compliance.
The general prohibition of unfair commercial practices
Article 24 of the consumer-protection legislation sets the baseline: unfair commercial practices are prohibited. A commercial practice is unfair where it contradicts the requirements of professional diligence and materially distorts, or is likely to distort, the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product or service supplied or intended for them. The same rule protects groups of consumers: where a practice is aimed at a defined group, the economic behaviour of the average member of that group must be taken into account, and for particularly vulnerable groups — such as consumers limited by age or abilities — it is precisely the average member of that group whose behaviour is assessed. The law also draws a natural boundary: a practice is not unfair where the information in an advertisement is merely exaggerated or is not meant to be taken literally. Unfair commercial practices comprise misleading commercial practices and aggressive commercial practices — and it is into these two forms that most algorithmic manipulation falls.
Misleading commercial practices by action
Article 25 places under the ban practices that actively mislead the consumer. The law names directly the techniques that are equally at home in a digital environment: offering goods or services at a special price without disclosing the material information on the basis of which the trader expects that it cannot supply the product in the advertised quantity or at the advertised price; promising a special price and then refusing to show the advertised product, to accept an order or to deliver it within a reasonable time; falsely stating that special conditions apply only for a very short period so that the consumer takes an immediate decision and is not given sufficient time and opportunity to make an informed choice; claiming that a product is free when the consumer must in fact pay an additional amount; establishing or promoting a pyramid scheme; inserting into marketing material a payment-obliging document that creates the false impression the consumer has ordered the goods. The general formula is particularly important: a practice is misleading where false information is provided, or information is presented in a manner — even with factually correct content — that deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer and causes them to take a transactional decision they would not otherwise have taken.