Tag
The article discusses how Chinese courts assign liability for AI-driven job displacement to humans, while the US lacks similar regulations, highlighting gaps in employment protection amid AI advancements.
This working paper examines whether India's Consumer Protection Act, 2019, adequately addresses harms caused by defective AI products and services, highlighting gaps in causation and liability allocation across the AI value chain.
The article examines how AI systems' lack of legal responsibility creates a burgeoning market for human accountability, insurance, and liability services, using the Air Canada chatbot ruling as a key example.
Bruce Schneier comments on a German ruling holding Google liable for errors in its AI overviews, arguing that AI agents should be treated as agents of their deployers.
A German court ruled that Google is directly liable for false information in its AI Overviews, as they constitute the company's own statements, not mere search results, setting a significant precedent for AI-generated content liability.
This paper proposes an interaction-based framework for allocating tort liability when agentic AI systems cause harm, drawing on Bratman's planning theory and common law concerted action doctrines to map human-AI interaction types onto existing liability rules.
A new federal case, Joshi v. OpenAI Foundation, has been filed alleging that an AI chatbot failed to warn authorities about a user planning a mass shooting at Florida State University. This adds to a growing list of lawsuits regarding AI's role in violent acts, focusing on the 'duty to warn' rather than direct instigation.
The widow of a Florida State University mass shooting victim has filed a federal lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPT assisted the suspect in planning the attacks.
In federal court Anthropic admitted it cannot control or recall Claude once deployed, exposing a governance gap where vendors disclaim post-sale control and shifting liability questions toward pre-sale disclosure.