AI: Is It a "Person" in Terms of the Legal System

This question is not from a sci-fi novel or film: Should AI be granted the legal status of "person?"

In the court of law, it would have the rights and responsibilities of you and me. For example, AI could be a legal actor in contracts (think smart contracts on blockchain), have ownership of property and much more.

Bloomberg Law reports: 

"AI systems aren’t legal persons, but they’re beginning to behave like them. They make decisions, execute agreements, and act independently of their creators. Yet when things go wrong, the law lacks clarity about who’s accountable."

 For example, if AI makes a big mistake in a commercial transaction or goes out of control and authorizes the destruction of thousands of human beings and has been granted legal personhood, does that let his creators and "owners" off the hook legally? Yeah, blame AI and bring it into the woodshed for a spanking and more. Organizations such as Anthropic and OpenAI would bear no civil or criminal accountability.

Already thought leadership, ranging from AI ethics expert Paul Chaney to podcasters at law firm Paul Weiss, discuss what kinds of guardrails should be mandated for AI. 

Meanwhile Bloomberg has us ponder this:

" ... legal personhood brings rights as well as obligations. Under Citizens United, corporations enjoy free speech protections. If extended to AI, could a system claim First Amendment rights?"

What would the Trump administration say about this freedom-of-speech issue for AI?

Rattled by the uncertainty? Faith-based Career Coaching. Special expertise with transitions, reskilling and aging. Psychic/tarot readings, upon request. Complimentary consultation with Jane Genova (Text 203-468-8579, janegenova374@gmail.com). Yes, test out the chemistry.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Global Gasp: Donald Trump Tells Off Big Banking

Apparent Second Assassination Attempt on Donald Trump: Will This Negatively Impact Harris-Walz Campaign?

Mr. Paul Weiss Goes to Washington