nova_ad_vitum, 4 months ago If the court hand found any other way, then any time the chatbot makes a mistake, they just wash their hands of it and let the consumer takes the hit. It would have been just a matter of time the chatbot started making “mistakes” that financially benefitted the company more and more. This means they are responsible for what the chatbot says, and is at least moderately sane. Does this decision carry any precedent? It was a tribunal, not a court.
If the court hand found any other way, then any time the chatbot makes a mistake, they just wash their hands of it and let the consumer takes the hit.
It would have been just a matter of time the chatbot started making “mistakes” that financially benefitted the company more and more.
This means they are responsible for what the chatbot says, and is at least moderately sane.
Does this decision carry any precedent? It was a tribunal, not a court.