As a user of the internet I can only imagine this worsening my experience by allowing even more slop to permeate the network's every orifice.

Also, when an agent sets up a domain, who is the domain owner? Who responds to takedown requests? What if it then decides to host illegal content at the domain (generated or otherwise). Who is responsible? Agents aren't (yet) legal persons, so it must be the person who owns the agent, but if that person never even sees the legal agreement being agreed to how would it hold up in court? If the person didn't direct the creation or hosting of illegal content, what then?

Humans will not win in court with a "but the agent did it, I had no idea" argument. Just look at how the cases against OAI are going, and that's where families lose a loved one. There's not going to be any sympathy when your agent committed fraud on your behalf.

And it's not like pro agent companies have a reason to self regulate. They're not going to absorb that liability voluntarily, they'll push it onto users contractually (most of them already do). This is just another channel to bring in customers. They will capitalize ruthlessly to increase their bottom line.

Interesting questions you bring up. Especially the legal ramifications as to how it would fully work within current legal framework. I suppose there would be a broad disclaimer and agreement one would have to agree to that would state that users of the service are ultimately responsible to monitor and ensure websites deployed by agents comply with local laws. Ultimately I assume that since it is not the agent who pays but a registered user that the user would own the site. And that the legal agreement would be agreed to beforehand so it is legally binding.