Legal scholar: AI liability exemptions bias the law against humans, here's a fix
dhadfieldmenell · x · 2026-10-07
- Researcher dhadfieldmenell calls this one of the easiest wins in AI regulation: whenever AI does something that would be a tort or crime for a human, some person should be held responsible.
- Proposed split: users are responsible for intended behavior, developers for unintended behavior.
- Commenters argue that by exempting AI from liability, the law is actually biased against humans.
Related event: Scholars Propose Liability Framework: Delegating to AI Won't Shield You(2 posts)→
More from Safety
- ChatGPT uploads pasted clipboard images before you even hit send, user finds — Innomen · 2026-10-07
- How Abliterated Models Can Get You Pwned — Thrumpwart · 2026-10-07
- OpenAI to watermark ChatGPT outputs by default in the EU under AI Act — Ars Technica AI · 2026-10-07
- Luiza Jarovsky: Beyond a capability threshold, AI alignment is likely impossible — LuizaJarovsky · 2026-10-07
- François Fleuret: IP and regulations are AI's last stand — and they'll be crushed — francoisfleuret · 2026-10-07
- Musubi releases PolicyLM-1.7B, an open-weights model for real-time content moderation — TechCrunch AI · 2026-10-07