Overview of That UL safety logo is a lot more complicated than it looks
In this Decoder interview, The Verge’s Nilay Patel talks with Jennifer Scanlon, CEO of UL Solutions, about how the familiar UL mark works, why product safety certification still matters, and how UL is trying to adapt to new technologies like AI, connected devices, and battery-heavy consumer products. The conversation covers UL’s unusual three-part structure, the role of standards in shaping markets, the challenge of enforcing safety in fast-moving tech ecosystems, and the political pressure surrounding China-linked supply chains and federal certification programs.
What UL Actually Does
UL is best known for the safety logo on electronics and appliances, but the company’s work is broader than many people realize.
Core functions
- Testing products for safety risks
- Inspecting manufacturing and deployment environments
- Certifying products against standards
- Developing software tools for risk and compliance management
Scanlon describes UL as a global organization of about 15,000 employees that “breaks things, blows them up, and lights them on fire” to understand failure modes before products reach consumers.
Notable testing examples
- Lithium-ion batteries exploding during abuse testing
- Hazardous location testing for equipment used in combustible environments like factories and oil rigs
- A memorable fire test where UL stacked 2 million soda cans to see how they would behave under ignition
Why Safety Standards Still Matter
The discussion emphasizes that UL’s authority no longer comes only from insurance companies requiring certification. Instead, its relevance comes from a mix of:
- Government regulations
- Insurance and underwriting requirements
- Tort and liability concerns
- Customer demand from manufacturers
- Consumer trust in recognizable safety marks
Scanlon argues that UL’s business is ultimately built on trust, and that trust depends on maintaining high scientific and engineering standards.
UL’s Three-Part Structure
A major theme of the interview is UL’s unusual corporate setup.
The three entities
- UL Solutions — the for-profit, publicly traded company
- UL Standards and Engagement — the standards-development nonprofit
- UL Research Institutes — the research nonprofit
Why the split happened
- UL began as a nonprofit in 1894
- It operated as a nonprofit until 2012
- The organization split so the for-profit side could compete more effectively while the nonprofit side remained focused on standards and research
- In 2024, UL Solutions went public, while the nonprofit standards organization retained ownership of the shareholder position and received proceeds to support its endowment
Scanlon stresses that the entities are run separately, even though they maintain a strategic relationship.
How UL Standards Get Adopted
UL does not simply impose standards top-down. Scanlon explains that standards usually emerge through a consensus process grounded in science and customer demand.
Typical path to a standard
- Customers raise a safety problem
- UL researchers and engineers study the issue
- UL Standards and Engagement develops a draft standard
- Governments, insurers, or other authorities may adopt it
- Manufacturers begin building to that standard across markets
Example: e-bikes in New York City
- Lithium-ion battery fires caused deaths in New York
- UL helped create standards for safer battery charging, use, and installation
- Those standards were written into New York law
- UL says deaths dropped by 75% after adoption
The point: a standard becomes powerful when it becomes a market-wide baseline.
UL’s Push Into AI Safety
A large part of the interview focuses on UL’s newer work on AI, especially UL 3115, a framework for evaluating AI-based products before and during deployment.
What the standard is trying to address
- Bias
- Transparency
- Privacy
- Fairness
- Data provenance
- Functional safety in AI-embedded products
Scanlon says UL is not trying to inspect the “black box” of AI models in the abstract, but rather to ensure that AI used in products does not create safety failures.
Examples discussed
- AI in child’s toys
- AI in building control systems
- AI in data centers
- AI inside products where software errors could create physical hazards
UL’s concern is that AI should not make products inherently unsafe, even if the model itself is unpredictable.
The Challenge: AI Is Moving Faster Than Regulation
Patel repeatedly presses on a key issue: why would frontier AI labs or fast-moving startups bother with certification if no regulator forces them to?
Scanlon’s answer
UL sees pressure coming mostly from:
- Large multinational customers
- Global supply chains
- Cross-border regulatory expectations
- Future consumer demand
But she also acknowledges that, for now, this is an uphill battle and that there is no strong top-down enforcement mechanism in AI yet.
Her main concern
- AI companies may prioritize speed and proprietary advantage over safety
- Without shared standards, each company may follow its own path
- UL believes third-party testing and certification can prevent unsafe outcomes
Batteries, Counterfeits, and Amazon
The transcript spends significant time on the explosion of battery-powered products, especially those sold online.
Key points
- Cheap lithium-ion products are flooding the market
- Many are made in China and sold through platforms like Amazon
- Amazon is a UL customer, and UL says certification information is available there
- UL also runs market surveillance and anti-counterfeiting efforts
- The company works with customs officials and other authorities to catch fake UL marks
Why this matters
Battery fires can be extremely dangerous:
- Lithium-ion fires can become lethal in under 30 seconds
- Uncertified products can create serious consumer and public-safety risks
UL sees its role as both testing products and helping enforce standards in the marketplace.
The Cybertrust Mark and U.S.-China Tensions
The conversation also touches on the FCC’s Cybertrust Mark program, meant to certify connected devices for cybersecurity and safety.
What happened
- UL was tapped under the Biden administration to help lead the program
- Under FCC Chair Brendan Carr, UL was removed from that role
- The implication was that UL’s China operations created a conflict
- Scanlon says UL was transparent and that the company simply transferred the work back to the FCC
Her stance
- UL maintains its China relationships are legitimate and transparent
- It has operated in China for 40 years
- Scanlon rejects the idea that devices made in China are inherently unsafe
- She argues that third-party standards are a better mechanism than blanket suspicion
How Scanlon Makes Decisions
Scanlon gives a straightforward management philosophy:
- Ground decisions in data
- Empower the people closest to the problem
- Never overrule scientific or engineering judgments
She says that if a customer disputes a test result, she will not override the lab’s scientific conclusion. That independence, she argues, is central to UL’s credibility.
Biggest Takeaways
1. UL’s logo is backed by a large, complex safety ecosystem
It’s not just a stamp—it’s a network of testing, standards, research, inspections, and enforcement.
2. Safety standards can shape markets
When standards become part of law, procurement, or customer expectations, they can drive industry-wide behavior.
3. AI safety is still early
UL is trying to define standards for AI-embedded products, but the market is moving faster than regulators or consensus bodies.
4. Trust is UL’s core asset
Scanlon repeatedly returns to the idea that UL can only survive if it remains scientifically rigorous and independent.
5. Enforcement remains the hardest problem
Whether it’s batteries, IoT devices, or AI software, the big question is still: who forces companies to care?
Notable Quote
“Know by test, state the facts.”
This is presented as UL’s foundational philosophy and the clearest summary of how the company thinks about safety and credibility.