Why
Reassurance is not the same as a check
Most marketing copy is never checked against the rules that actually govern it. It is written to sound confident, approved because nobody objected, and published because the deadline arrived. The first time it meets the actual rule is when a regulator, a competitor, or a customer complains, and by then the cost is a ruling, not a rewrite.
That gap exists because checking copy against real regulatory rules, across every market you sell into, has always been slow, expensive, or both. A solo creator or a small marketing team was never going to commission a compliance review for a landing page. So the copy went out unchecked, and the business found out the hard way what a regulator meant by misleading, unsubstantiated, or undisclosed.
We built a checker to close that gap, not by writing another vague best practices guide, but by asking the same three questions a regulator actually asks, and answering them in under a minute, before a complaint ever gets filed.
Where we are
Every real compliance question has three parts
Strip away the legal language and a compliance question is always the same shape: what was actually said, where the rules that govern it apply, and whether the claim holds up. Almost every piece of marketing copy that gets flagged fails on one of these three, not because the writer meant to mislead, but because nobody checked all three before it went out.
What. Not what the business meant to say. The checker reads the literal words on the page, the same way a regulator would, because that is the only version of the claim that actually gets enforced against.
Where. The same sentence can be perfectly fine in one market and prohibited in another. An income claim that is unremarkable in one jurisdiction can be a strict-liability breach in the next. Every flag names the specific jurisdiction whose rule it breaks, across eleven jurisdictions, not a generic "this might be a problem somewhere."
Whether. Whether the claim is substantiated, not just whether it sounds plausible. A guarantee, a health claim, an income promise, a before-and-after result: whether it holds up under the standard a regulator actually applies, checked against thirty risk categories built from real enforcement action, not hypothetical ones.
A claim that answers all three cleanly is not a risk. A claim that fails even one of them is exactly what shows up in a ruling six months later, and by then the business rarely remembers writing it.
Everything the checker offers today
Built to be tried, not just described
None of this is theoretical. Paste your own copy in and the same three questions get answered in front of you.
Compliance checking. Marketing copy checked against the actual rules regulators enforce, across eleven jurisdictions and thirty risk categories, in under a minute. Try it on the compliance assessment page, no account required.
A suite of free tools. A fine calculator that shows real regulatory exposure, an accessibility checker, an influencer disclosure checker, a shadow AI audit, and more, all free, built to demonstrate the standard rather than gate it behind a sales call.
The other half of the question. Checking what a business said is only half the job. What a business did, and who was accountable for it, is a different question with its own framework. See who, when, whether, the governance side of the same standard.
Honest pricing. Checking copy against the law should not cost what this industry charges for it. Small businesses and solo operators should be able to afford the same standard of proof as anyone else.