Much of the discussion on artificial intelligent (AI) generated works have been based on ownership and ownership rights to the works generated by AI and not focusing on the liability obligations of AI generated works. As stated by Chris Temple: “ ?”
One main issue that centers around this discussion is whether the legislature or the courts will take the lead in developing new guidance for AI-generated works. In order to fully clarify liability obligations for AI generated works, the best option will be for individuals and entities to have contractual provisions “”. These contractual provisions would help them limit their liability exposures from AI generated works.
Another liability obligation that comes up under tort is that of negligence; where certain questions like: “? ? ?”.
In order to address these unending questions regarding where liability begins and ends, the major issue for the courts would be the test of reasonable foreseeability, that is, “”. In a case where there is a lack of foreseeability, the law might replace the negligence test with that of strict liability, which would provide that a defendant will still be held legally responsible when neither an intentional nor a negligent act has been found and .
In conclusion, it is important for organizations to brace themselves for both the positive and possible negative consequences like the liability that AI generated works could bring to them. With guidance from the legislature or the courts, it would get easier to ascertain who should be liable for any claims arising from AI generated works.
Eniola Olawuyi is an LLM student at Osgoode Hall Law School studying Intellectual Property Law.