Oregon nonprofits press their suit over fundraising pages a crowdfunding company built in their names
Six nonprofits say the company used AI to make pages with their names and logos without their consent. The company asked a federal magistrate judge in Eugene to dismiss the case; she has not said when she will rule.
Eugene. Six Oregon nonprofits asked a federal court in Eugene in late October to let their class action against a crowdfunding company go forward. They say the company used artificial intelligence to build fundraising pages with their names and logos without asking them. The company asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Amy E. Potter to dismiss the case. She took the arguments under advisement and did not say when she would rule.
Three organizations filed the suit in March. According to The Oregonian, which reported from the hearing, the plaintiffs are now Commute Options for Central Oregon, a Bend group that promotes public transportation; the Eugene Public Library Foundation; the McKenzie Valley Long Term Recovery Group of Lane County, formed in 2021 to help wildfire survivors; the Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association; Outdoor Education Adventures; and the WaterStrong Initiative, a Portland group that works to reduce drownings. As a class action, it may still take in more.
What the nonprofits say
The nonprofits allege that the company drew the names of about 1.4 million nonprofits from public IRS records and made pages for them without telling them. According to The Register-Guard, they said the company would not take the pages down, and that they could reach money given through them only by claiming the pages and accepting the company's terms, including its cut. The company later removed the pages.
Mikal C. Watts, the nonprofits' lawyer, said in court, The Oregonian reported, that the company charged a fee of 2.2 percent plus 30 cents on each gift and asked givers for a tip of up to 17.5 percent. The plaintiffs seek damages for false association and unjust enrichment, and argued that they need discovery to learn what was collected.
The company's answer
Matan Shacham, the company's lawyer, said the pages were meant to steer its visitors toward charities, like the listings search and review sites publish about businesses. He told the court that nobody gave through the six plaintiffs' pages, so no fees or tips were collected. The company also argues that its use of the names and logos is fair use.
“This is a case about truthful speech.”
The suit followed a March 3 letter in which California Attorney General Rob Bonta and 21 attorneys general and charity regulators, Oregon's among them, said the company had made pages for more than 1.4 million charities without their knowledge or consent, and demanded proof within 14 days that all of them were gone. The company answered that month, The Oregonian reported, that pages no charity had opted into had been removed and that no new ones would be made without a charity's approval. Alaska's attorney general has a separate suit against the company.
About this story
501c3.help wrote this story from the sources listed with it, not from material an organization sent. Our editors approved it on Nov. 4, 2026. Stories in The Nonprofit Herald are free, and nothing is asked in return. Editorial rules.
Found an error? Write to [email protected] and we will correct it.