header-logo header-logo

Electronic persons: time for a new legal personality?

11 August 2017 / David Kidman , Stephen Turner
Issue: 7758 / Categories: Features , Insurance surgery , Technology
printer mail-detail
05_kidman

Product liability law has to get to grips with the emerging complexities of artificial intelligence, say David Kidman & Stephen Turner

  • Smart technology, with interconnected devices speaking to each other, makes it difficult to establish liability

In May 2017, the European Commission published the results of a public consultation on the fitness for purpose of the Product Liability Directive (enacted in the UK by the Consumer Protection Act 1987). Many questions set by the Commission related to the Directive’s application to smart objects, robots and new tech. Approximately two-thirds of respondents agreed that producers of software, apps and algorithms should potentially be held liable, but that there are difficulties allocating liability in respect of products interacting with other products or services (eg smartphone malfunction due to an app) and in respect of products operating on algorithms (eg cars with parking sensors), including self-learning algorithms (AI).

Crucially, 58.33% of respondents did not agree that there should be liability exemptions for innovative products under experimentation, indicating that consumers would resist

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll