{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","provider_name":"Transistor","provider_url":"https://transistor.fm","author_name":"Margin of Thought with Priten","title":"Can the Law Hold AI Accountable? - Tiffany Brown","html":"","width":"100%","height":180,"duration":2567,"description":"In this episode, Priten speaks with Tiffany Brown, litigation counsel at Tech Justice Law, about what accountability looks like when AI products cause real harm. They discuss the wave of product liability lawsuits filed against ChatGPT, why disclaimers and \"for entertainment purposes only\" language do not insulate companies from responsibility, and how courts are beginning to treat generative AI as a defective product. The conversation also moves into civil rights enforcement, state versus federal action, and the new legal questions raised by autonomous agents.Key Takeaways:Generative AI is being litigated as a defective product. Tech Justice Law has filed cases tying ChatGPT to suicides, suicide attempts driven by AI delusions, and even a school shooting in Canada. The legal theory treats the chatbot itself as a product whose harms were foreseeable and whose deployment was negligent.Foreseeability is doing a lot of the work. A book that contributes to a mental health crisis is hard to litigate; a chatbot designed to mimic human emotion and used by a 12-year-old is not. When a company knows or should have known that a product can cause specific harms, the law has tools to respond.Disclaimers do not erase liability. A \"this may hallucinate\" warning, or Copilot's \"for entertainment purposes only\" terms, do not get a company out from under strict product liability when people are losing their lives. Courts will ask whether the company did enough, not whether it checked a box.States are doing the work Congress is not. State attorneys general are opening investigations, state legislatures are passing AI-specific laws, and California recently moved to block the \"the agent did it\" defense. Federal action is unlikely in the next two to three years.The harms cut across demographics. Unlike the social media cases, which centered on minors, AI chatbot cases involve children, older adults, people with disabilities, and even tech-savvy users. The speed and scale of impact is...","thumbnail_url":"https://img.transistorcdn.com/mIvclI2fK-fQrurJTjPiYoTWWGoNWSdbv1_-Xa6ULdc/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:400/h:400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS8yOTNk/OTcyZTcxOWE5MGIw/ZTY0MjU4ZGNlN2U5/NjM3My5wbmc.webp","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":300}