Observed 9 September 2026. Bounded public-source search closed. This lane did not acquire a company reply, an attributed policy change, meeting record or AG compliance determination tied specifically to the 22 August 2025 letters. That is a scoped result, not evidence that no private reply, meeting or resulting change exists. Parent independently owns acquisition and reading of the original combined letters and Pennsylvania announcement.
Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador's 19 September 2025 newsletter returns to the 47-AG letters, restates demands on payment processors and search providers, and presents implementation or legal consequences as the choice facing recipients. It links separate search/payment letters. This is documented subsequent public pressure by a signatory. It reports no company reply, agreed commitment, meeting, particular enforcement filing or implemented change. Its assertions about continuing company conduct remain the AG's assertions, not an independent audit of platform behavior. The newsletter's separately claimed ICAC results are not an outcome of these letters and are not used here.
[Idaho AG newsletter](http[local research file] complete substantive body read, web lines97-116, especially108-115. Publisher date19September2025. Official web-reader substantive read, followed by one successful ordinary GET of the original newsletter. Exact linked-letter hrefs were extracted from that HTML; linked PDF bytes were not independently compared with parent's original.
California's 26 August 2025 announcement describes the letters as seeking information and opening communication with companies. That is an intention to engage, not proof a conversation happened. Read with Idaho's later threat framing rather than treating either summary as the exact operative instrument. [California AG announcement](http[local research file] complete substantive announcement body lines157-184 read; relevant paragraphs166-173. This is contemporaneous framing, not a later outcome. Official web-reader only; no original bytes captured.
A defensible new relation is Idaho AG -> the letter campaign: publicly reiterates demands and warns of legal consequences on19September2025. It is a public warning/advocacy act, not an order, filing, adjudication or observed compliance. No company-response edge should be added from this pass.
The San Francisco Chronicle's 17 July 2026 report says Chiu's July16 Apple/Google notices cite the 47-AG warning as prior notice. This is a reported legal-use connection; the original notices were not acquired, so their wording and proposed legal significance remain unverified here. [Reported later citation](http[local research file]
The official former office home redirects from http[local research file] to http[local research file] with an April24,2026 archived-site boundary. Home and news links were inspected; http[local research file] returned only three web-reader lines. Targeted searches of both official domains did not locate the notices. Stop this route here; the gap is the actual July16 notices, attachments and subsequent response correspondence held by the office and recipients, not proof the reported notices do not exist.
[TechCrunch's separate July report](http[local research file] reports responses to San Francisco's action, not a reply to NAAG. No original response acquired.
Magica's derivative summary was inspected solely to look for links to originals; its citation of the earlier warning leads to the Chronicle, not an original notice. Its link list does not independently corroborate that lineage. Scope: date/title and main body77-124 plus source links125-138. [Derivative discovery page](http[local research file] Do not promote its app-count, financial or legal analyses from this search.
The 29 August 2025 Payment Expert article repeats the letters' requests and prior interventions, and contains no company response in its inspected substantive body. Scope: lines165-221. It is secondary reporting, not an official reply or outcome. Its incidental legal summary was not adopted. [Contemporaneous reporting](http[local research file]
Civitai/Pornhub interventions cited as precedents in the letters must stay antecedent examples. This pass did not freshly investigate their events or infer they were caused by the later letters. Steam/adult-game restrictions, separate AI-company letters, xAI actions, vaping and other branches were excluded. Search results about those subjects were discovery noise, not accepted evidence. Company measures or legislative activity that predate22August2025 cannot be counted as responses merely because search returned them; no complete policy-version history was reconstructed.
One focused pass used the following18 query strings, without a recency restriction. Search engine indexing and compound-domain query interpretation limit completeness; these are not exhaustive searches of every company or AG record system.
"August 22, 2025" "attorneys general" "payment" deepfake response
"NAAG" "47" "deepfake" "response"
"attorneys general" "deepfake" "August" "2025" Mastercard reply
"attorneys general" "deepfake" "August" "2025" Google response
site.sfcityattorney.org Apple Google nudify "2026" "August"
site.mastercard.com "attorneys general" "deepfake"
site.visa.com "attorneys general" "deepfake"
"August 22, 2025" "deepfake" "respond"
"Chiu" "July 17, 2026" "Apple" "cityattorney"
site.sfcityattorney.org "nudify"
site.sfcityattorney.org "nonconsensual" "Apple"
"47" "deepfake" "response" "PayPal"
site.sf.gov "Chiu" "Apple" "nudify"
site.blog.google "attorneys general" "deepfake"
site.naag.org "deepfake" "response" "payment"
"deepfake" "attorneys general" response site:paypal.com OR site:americanexpress.com OR site:apple.com
"deepfake" "attorneys general" response site:microsoft.com OR site:blogs.bing.com OR site:yahooinc.com
"August 22" "2025" "NCII" "response"
Company-domain searches did not surface a specific original reply to these letters. They did produce pre-existing material and unrelated hosted content; domain appearance alone was not treated as corporate authorship. Exact-date searches also produced unrelated meanings of NCII. No broad archive enumeration, authenticated access, public-record request, contact, spending or case mutation occurred. Web-reader locators are retrieval-specific; this file is a scoped reading/search note, not a preserved set of website originals.
For response or compliance: recipient general-counsel replies explicitly identifying these letters, the lead AGs' correspondence/meeting log and any agreed implementation or escalation document. A dated internal or public policy change must identify this intervention or a matched correspondence chain before causal attribution. Lack of public outcome reporting could reflect private engagement, refusal, incomplete public indexing, no action, or action for other reasons; this search does not select among them. For the narrower reported SF lineage, obtain the actual July16 notices before mapping the 2025 warning into that later legal theory. No subsequent branch is started by this return.
At parent request, one ordinary unauthenticated GET succeeded with HTTP200 at2026-09-09T11:40:24.462431+00:00. Retained response-idaho-newsletter.html,62,317bytes, SHA-2564e8a67b3aafe342a0dfd53fa853aae662a4ddda5bdd9b17b32d24ce6cbf78608. response-idaho-capture.json records scope and exact source hrefs. These substantiate where the newsletter directs readers; the linked PDFs were not newly fetched or treated as independent outcomes.
Search-letter href: http[local research file]
Payment-letter href: http[local research file]
The September upload directory does not independently establish a different letter date. Parent has separately retained the Pennsylvania combined original at its current exact href; this lane makes no byte-identity claim about the separate Idaho PDFs. Acquisition remains closed.