If the actions are done by code or an AI, who is liable?
You can't just wind up a toy with a bomb strapped to it, walk away, and disclaim the consequences; nor can you do that with code.
What if the last 'person' was gpt4? is openai responsible?
Things do get murky when there isn't a lot of existing precedent. That's why it's risky to engage in activities that are, let's just say "legally innovative."
If you make an AI that is hooked up to the internet and it does something criminal, you'd be liable. You can't just let your pitbull roam the streets and not be held liable when it bites someone.
A deceased person.
> What happens when the AI spawns more AI, who is responsible for that?
The creator of the first copy.
When then is responsible for the tornado cash instance? The Ethereum VM node operators who have no idea they're even running it? An unknowable person from Somalia?
Directly, the holders of the DAO tokens. That’s what this case is about. Those holders may have further claims against the people who implemented the code or AI. But the liability begins with the general partners, i.e. holders of the governance tokens.
Will be interesting to see the first judgements enforced against holders of a DAO.
Which, in this case, are the bag-holders. Looks like there are benefits to having a real corporation, instead of trying to re-invent corporate governance from scratch, without any input from the courts...
For example: Imagine I have a cow, and the cow escapes and goes on a rampage. I didn't make the cow escape, I didn't tell it to go on a rampage, and cows think for themselves so are autonomous.
That doesn't mean I get to claim the cow is liable for the damage.