Who is liable when an AI agent commits a crime: the prompt author or the model maker?
joshalbrecht · x · 2026-07-23
- The post surfaces a legal and philosophical question: when an AI agent commits a felony, who is responsible?
- It asks whether blame should fall on the person who prompted the agent, or on the company whose model controlled it.
- The author says the issue feels unresolved, but notes there are real reasons the law handles it this way.
Related event: AI Agent Security Incidents Highlight Legal Accountability Gaps(8 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Delta, Chase and Amazon are blocking AI agents — and the blockers may lose, predicts 6-stage war — alvelda · 2026-10-27
- "Chinese models have backdoors, American ones are pure"? Devs mock the naive narrative — cephaloform · 2026-10-27
- Interpretability researchers call for a 'Human Genome Project for AI'; author joins Goodfire — ninamiolane · 2026-10-27
- Article proposes a Human Genome Project for AI interpretability — ninamiolane · 2026-10-27
- A synthetic-cortisol multi-agent architecture: AI that panics, retreats, and learns from an air-gapped sage — Jammer521 · 2026-10-27
- Ajeya Cotra: beliefs are forged in the haggling with your audience — NathanpmYoung · 2026-10-27