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
- Misquoted: Anthropic Staff Warned of Double-Digit Extinction Risk by 2030, Not Dismissed It — davidmanheim · 2026-09-11
- Economist Ben Moll: You Can Model Anthropic's 15% AI GDP Growth, But It Won't Happen — sebkrier · 2026-09-11
- Cohere Labs launches interactive tool mapping which tasks of 178 occupations AI can automate — Cohere_Labs · 2026-09-11
- AI researcher on SkyNews flags concerns over inequality, power and criminal misuse — schwarzjn_ · 2026-09-11
- VC compares AI doom rhetoric to pandemic-era fear messaging — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-11
- Anthropic Insiders: Not Everyone at the Lab Believes in High p(doom) — anpaure · 2026-09-11