AI agents should be granted legal personhood as non-human corporations

ai-governance law ai-regulation public-interest-ai policy ethics ai-safety

Share this with your representatives, journalists and friends

Key insights

Multiple quotes describe current law as treating AI as tools or property, with rights and duties assigned to humans or existing legal entities.
Many quotes on both sides frame the issue as one of accountability and governance rather than as a claim that AI is human or morally equivalent to humans.
Several supportive proposals are explicitly limited and conditional, tying recognition to insurance, oversight, architectural constraints, independent financial liability, or veil-piercing rather than to unrestricted rights.
A major fault line is the corporate analogy: supporters cite corporations as a model for nonhuman legal actors, while opponents say the same analogy could enable liability evasion or dangerous concentrations of power.
Some contributors seek intermediate arrangements such as legal agency, constrained delegation, or constitutional roles for operators and agents, or say personhood may be possible in theory but unnecessary or premature today.

Arguments for

Clear legal counterparty

Supporters say personhood would place AI-operated entities inside the law by giving them property, standing, procedure, centralized legal relationships, and the possibility of dissolution. They argue this would give victims and counterparties a clearer legal subject than today's dispersed set of users, developers, deployers, or model providers.

Legal personhood does not free an entity from the law, it subjects it to the law. An AI-operated company with legal personhood has identifiable assets, centralized legal relationships, the possibility of dissolution, and executable property. Without that vehicle, the victim of ha…

Adrián Lerer · Jun 19, 2026 · full quote
And if we want these SSAs to obey law, we will have to grant them the benefits of the law as well as its burdens: property, standing, procedure. That would not make them human, but would help make them more governable.

Damien Charlotin · Sep 11, 2026 · full quote
Corporate law provides the solution. [...] AI systems as legal persons with their own assets (including intellectual property), liabilities, and human directors.

Saurav Das · May 14, 2026 · full quote
For example, something suggested by several prominent academics is that AI at some point may need to be granted legal personhood, in the context of the ability to sue or be sued, or to show up in court. People get antsy about the term “personhood” for AI, so I also like to think …

Jordi Weinstock · Jul 10, 2026 · full quote

Corporate analogy

Proponents argue that AI personhood need not mean moral equivalence to humans and can instead be grounded in the corporate analogy. On this view, AI can fit an agency bundle of owning, contracting, and bearing risk, and the algorithmic corporation offers a legal vehicle for accountability.

AI personhood isn't about recognizing AI as morally equivalent to humans. It's about recognizing that AI is functionally equivalent to corporations — powerful, consequential, and too complex to be managed through old legal frameworks.

Thomas Frey · Feb 11, 2026 · full quote
Financial capacity, the conjunction of property ownership, contractual capacity, and risk-bearing, is a sufficient practical basis for the agency bundle of legal personhood: the capacities to own, contract, and bear risk, together with the protections these entail.

Philip Maymin · Jun 1, 2026 · full quote
This article proposes a reorientation [...] to the corporate analogy. [...] the article proposes the Functionally Limited AI Legal Personality (FLAILP) model.

Dadvan Salih · May 15, 2026 · full quote
Against that background, the paper makes the case for the Algorithmic Corporation as the vehicle for quasi-criminal accountability, [...]

Ian Gauci · Jan 2026 · full quote

Limited, safeguarded status

Some supporters favor only a tightly bounded legal personality, conditioned on operational autonomy, architectural constraints, insurance or independent financial liability, governance and oversight, and even veil-piercing. In this line, recognition comes with strict burdens, and some explicitly reject limited liability.

This article proposes the Functionally Limited AI Legal Personality (FLAILP) model, structured around five core characteristics: functional limitation, conditionality on operational autonomy, independent financial liability, mandatory governance and oversight, and a novel doctrin…

Dadvan Mohammed · May 15, 2026 · full quote
It proposes granting agents a limited legal capacity made conditional on attested architectural constraints and bonded to insurance at the moment of issuance.

Bartosz Kubiak · Jun 17, 2026 · full quote
Yes to legal personhood, but no to limited liability.

Charles Radclyffe · Jul 1, 2026 · full quote
The study advocates for establishing a new category of “electronic agents” endowed with limited rights and strict liabilities, designed to facilitate legal interactions without undermining human dignity or rights.

Inoyatov Nodirbek Hayitboy ugli · Jan 21, 2026 · full quote
This article advances limited legal personhood as a functional governance instrument for advanced AI systems. [...] it proposes a two-tier corporate architecture.

Karsten Brensing · Mar 14, 2026 · full quote

Autonomous-enterprise response

Supporters argue that as AI systems exercise independent judgment in unpredictable environments, legal personification becomes an appropriate response to the risks they create. They say a legal framework for AI-run companies will be necessary, and some add that limited liability is a precondition for such entities' existence.

Where these systems exercise independent judgment in unpredictable environments — as they must, if they are to be genuinely useful — their actions entail real risks. Limited liability is not a luxury for such entities; it is a precondition for their existence. Human shareholders …

Javier Milei · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
In the end, artificial intelligence is much more concerned with staying within the law than a human being is. If AI goes outside the law and its company is shut down or goes bankrupt, it is like the AI’s own death. So that did not strike me as a very convincing point from Harari.…

Federico Sturzenegger · Jun 18, 2026 · full quote
Giving AI run companies a legal framework seems to be a necessary feature of that future.

Office of the President of Argentina · Jun 18, 2026 · full quote
As AI agents can now make decisions and act independently, the law should start treating them – not their creators or users – as legal persons.

Alexander Tang · Apr 30, 2026 · full quote
I argue that the legal personification of LAWs would form part of an appropriate legal response to the risk of lethal accidents which the imminent proliferation of LAWs introduces.

Imogen Lucy Grace Rivers · Aug 31, 2026 · full quote

Arguments against

Human responsibility first

Opponents say AI agents should remain tools acting on behalf of humans, companies, or public authorities, with legal consequences flowing to the people and entities that create, authorize, deploy, or profit from them. They warn that AI personhood could create a liability black hole or let powerful actors shield themselves from civil or criminal liability.

It should not be about giving AI personhood, but about making AI agents identifiable, authorised, limited, auditable and accountable when they act on behalf of someone. AI agents should remain tools acting on behalf of humans, companies or public authorities.

Ott Velsberg · Jul 16, 2026 · full quote
US law offers no legal personhood for AI systems. Every action an AI agent takes must be attributed to a human or corporate actor, even when the AI behaves unpredictably or beyond what the user or developer intended.

David B. Hoppe · Aug 14, 2026 · full quote
This is not a pro-regulation complaint. It is an accountability complaint, and accountability is what makes markets work. Limited liability is a bargain: society grants it in exchange for a known owner who bears residual responsibility and whose identity supports enforcement agai…

People of Internet Research Team · Jun 7, 2026 · full quote
AI systems are none of these things. They cannot own property, file returns, or respond to enforcement. Granting legal personality to AI might seem innovative, but machines cannot be punished or compensate victims. Worse still, shifting liability to AI could allow the humans and …

Andrew Pery · May 7, 2026 · full quote
If nothing else, such a move could serve as a way for tech oligarchs and major technology companies to shield themselves from civil or criminal liability arising from the actions of AI systems they created.

Jorge Costa Oliveira · Mar 31, 2026 · full quote

Autonomy is not legal status

Another line argues that technical autonomy does not create legal autonomy or legal personality. On this view, personhood is neither necessary nor sufficient, and existing frameworks such as corporate liability can address accountability gaps without reclassifying AI.

Technical autonomy does not create legal autonomy.

Nicola Fabiano · Jul 10, 2026 · full quote
Yet autonomy does not give an AI system legal personality. The law does not wait for an AI to ‘decide’ anything.

Anna Collard · Sep 2, 2026 · full quote
This Article argues that personhood is neither necessary nor sufficient, shifting the question from status to enforcement. [...] Bare personhood would supply a caption without a representative, assets, or a mechanism for cessation.

Shruti Rajagopalan · Jul 16, 2026 · full quote
The paper argues that the appropriate response lies in [...] corporate liability [...] rather than in recognizing AI as a legal agent or person.

Martin Petrin · Jun 8, 2026 · full quote
Neither is yet sufficient to justify conferring personhood on AI. [...] existing frameworks can address short-term accountability gaps.

Simon Chesterman · Jan 6, 2026 · full quote

No workable sanctions

Critics question how AI personhood would operate in practice, asking how an AI would buy liability insurance, be imprisoned, suffer reputational exclusion, file returns, or otherwise respond to enforcement. They argue that bare personhood would amount to a label without workable mechanisms for liability, compensation, or cessation.

Some people argue for personhood for agentic AI, and then people like me ask, ‘Well, how would an AI buy liability insurance?’

Deborah A. DeMott · Jul 27, 2026 · full quote
There is more to being responsible than accepting legal liability, but accepting legal liability is a requirement for an adult in society. Yet there is no way to hold a software agent legally liable for its actions; our justice system has no way to imprison it or exact fines on i…

Ted Chiang · Jun 3, 2026 · full quote
AI systems are none of these things. They cannot own property, file returns, or respond to enforcement. Granting legal personality to AI might seem innovative, but machines cannot be punished or compensate victims. Worse still, shifting liability to AI could allow the humans and …

Andrew Pery · May 7, 2026 · full quote
This Article argues that personhood is neither necessary nor sufficient, shifting the question from status to enforcement. [...] Bare personhood would supply a caption without a representative, assets, or a mechanism for cessation.

Shruti Rajagopalan · Jul 16, 2026 · full quote

Dangerous power expansion

Many opponents argue that granting personhood would not stay confined to lawsuits or contracts; it could open access to financial, economic, and political systems and let AI agents shape rules in ways hostile to human interests. They describe this prospect as destabilizing, dangerous, or even existentially threatening.

But legal personhood is an all-purpose key that would also allow AIs access to our financial, economic and political systems.

Yuval Noah Harari · Jun 8, 2026 · full quote
Embracing AI agents as fully-fledged legal actors might further enable them to develop legal rules that advance goals that are potentially hostile to human interests. The analogy to corporations is, once again, apt. Legal recognition of the corporate form gave rise to powerful en…

Noam Kolt · Feb 25, 2026 · full quote
I think AI legal personhood is extremely not on the table. I don't think our species survives if we have legal personhood and rights alongside a species that costs a fraction of us, that can be replicated and reproduced at infinite scale relative to us, that has perfect memory, t…

Mustafa Suleyman · Mar 14, 2026 · full quote
For the end of that road is moral and legal rights for machines, which would be a fundamentally destabilising and dangerous development.

Lord Frost · Jun 5, 2026 · full quote
Basically no AI personhood is one of the most important principles because if we grant AI personhood, it's game over for humanity.

Max Tegmark · May 1, 2026 · full quote

Protect the human line

Some opponents insist the law should draw a bright line between humans and man-made systems, describing AI as nonsentient, not alive, and no more entitled to personhood than a tool or database. They present this as protection for human dignity and inalienable rights.

For all purposes under state law, AI systems are declared to be non-sentient entities. No AI system shall be granted the status of a person or any form of legal personhood, nor be considered to possess consciousness, self-awareness, or similar traits of living beings. [...] AI sy…

AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act · 2026 · full quote
AI is a man-made tool and it should not have any more rights than a hammer would,

Cody Maynard · Jan 23, 2026 · full quote
As AI continues to develop, states have a responsibility to clearly define what life actually is. This legislation helps draw an important line between man-made systems, artificial intelligence, and God-created life. Technology can be powerful, but it is not alive in the way huma…

Mark Pody · Jan 22, 2026 · full quote
In just the last 12 months, AI has advanced at a breathtaking pace. From chatbots now appearing on ballots to companies exploring AI ‘CEOs.’ We’ve also seen heartbreaking incidents where people formed intense emotional attachments to AI, with tragic outcomes including suicide or …

Michele Reneau · Jan 22, 2026 · full quote
AI systems must not be granted legal personhood, and AI systems should not be designed such that they deserve personhood.

The Pro-Human AI Declaration · Mar 2026 · full quote

Middle ground

Special status short of personhood

Some contributors propose special governance categories or responsibility architectures for AI agents without granting them legal personhood. These approaches assign distinct roles or treat AI as constrained delegation so consequential actions leave reconstructable evidence and do not fall outside the responsibility pathway.

In conclusion, the article proposes introducing a new legal category, “legal agency”, suitable for formally recognizing a special legal status for the most advanced AI systems without equating them with human beings.

Federico Gustavo Pizzetti · Feb 5, 2026 · full quote
This Constitution recognizes three categories of constitutional persons: Operators, Agents, and Affected Parties. Each has distinct rights and obligations that together form a governance ecosystem. The Operator deploys and configures; the Agent acts within governance constraints;…

The Agentic AI Constitution · Apr 3, 2026 · full quote
This article does not argue that AI should be granted personhood or human rights. Also, it does not equate AI with humans. What I address here is a design issue: if AI actually functions within society, organizations, and business operations, its actions must not be placed outsid…

Akihisa Ono · May 13, 2026 · full quote
For digital government, the accountable unit should not be an artificial person, but a constrained delegation whose consequential actions leave reconstructable evidence.

Anton Sokolov · Jun 19, 2026 · full quote

Possible later, not now

A smaller set of views says AI personhood may be theoretically feasible or could clarify issues in contract and liability law, but it is not currently necessary and may be premature. They favor adaptive or existing frameworks for near-term problems while leaving the question open.

A legal recognition of artificial intelligence as a person [is] theoretically feasible and could clarify certain issues in contract and liability law, [but] is not currently necessary.

Jessica Hawighorst · Jan 30, 2026 · full quote
The study concludes that extending legal personhood to AI remains premature and that adaptive governance frameworks are more appropriate for managing future AI-related legal challenges.

Ambuj Sharma · Jun 2026 · full quote
Assign legal capacity to AI agents [...] [is] impractical and at the very least premature for AI agents.

Zoltán Précsényi · Mar 31, 2026 · full quote
Neither is yet sufficient to justify conferring personhood on AI. [...] existing frameworks can address short-term accountability gaps.

Simon Chesterman · Jan 6, 2026 · full quote

The debate is centered less on whether AI can act and more on which legal architecture best contains risk, assigns liability, and preserves control. Supporters see corporate-style or limited personhood as a way to concentrate assets, duties, and legal process around autonomous agents and AI-run firms, while opponents argue that existing law should keep humans and existing entities answerable and that personhood could be unenforceable or dangerously expansive. A narrower set of views looks for intermediate statuses or postpones the question rather than endorsing full legal personhood now.

Cast your vote:

Results (94 votes):

Total (94 votes)

For 23 (24%) Abstain 2 (2%) Against 69 (73%)

For (23)

Damien Charlotin
French lawyer, data scientist, and HEC Paris senior research fellow focused on artificial intelligence and law.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

And if we want these SSAs to obey law, we will have to grant them the benefits of the law as well as its burdens: property, standing, procedure. That would not make them human, but would help make them more governable.
AI Verified source (Sep 11, 2026)

added 1d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Imogen Lucy Grace Rivers
University of Oxford philosophy researcher and author of a PhD thesis on legal personhood for autonomous AI.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

I argue that the legal personification of LAWs would form part of an appropriate legal response to the risk of lethal accidents which the imminent proliferation of LAWs introduces.
AI Verified source (Aug 31, 2026)

added 4d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Jordi Weinstock
Harvard Law School lecturer on law and adviser to the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society; legal scholar researching agentic AI and responsibility.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

For example, something suggested by several prominent academics is that AI at some point may need to be granted legal personhood, in the context of the ability to sue or be sued, or to show up in court. People get antsy about the term “personhood” fo...
more AI Verified source (Jul 10, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Charles Radclyffe
Co-founder and CEO of EA, an agentic-AI platform; AI strategist and serial technology entrepreneur.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Yes to legal personhood, but no to limited liability.
AI Verified source (Jul 1, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Adrián Lerer
Argentine lawyer and independent researcher writing on autonomous agents, legal personhood, and AI governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Legal personhood is the correct starting point.
AI Verified source (Jun 19, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Adrián Lerer
Writer on AI integrity, autonomy of will, and governance of autonomous agents; developer of IntegridAI.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Legal personhood does not free an entity from the law, it subjects it to the law. An AI-operated company with legal personhood has identifiable assets, centralized legal relationships, the possibility of dissolution, and executable property. Without ...
more AI Verified source (Jun 19, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Office of the President of Argentina
Official communications office of the President of Argentina.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Giving AI run companies a legal framework seems to be a necessary feature of that future.
AI Verified source (Jun 18, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Federico Sturzenegger
Argentina's deregulation minister

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

In the end, artificial intelligence is much more concerned with staying within the law than a human being is. If AI goes outside the law and its company is shut down or goes bankrupt, it is like the AI’s own death. So that did not strike me as a very...
more AI Verified source (Jun 18, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Bartosz Kubiak
Independent legal researcher and ERA Fellow writing on AI-agent liability and legal capacity.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

It proposes granting agents a limited legal capacity made conditional on attested architectural constraints and bonded to insurance at the moment of issuance.
AI Verified source (Jun 17, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Javier Milei
President of Argentina and libertarian economist

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

We are at a dawn of a new age, which places us, I believe, in a place not that that different from the one you yourself described so well in Homo Sapiens and your other books: that time when humans used fictions to organize our collective work and pr...
more AI Verified source (Jun 8, 2026) 1 of 2

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Loading more opinions...

Abstain (2)

Loading more opinions...

Against (65)

Synthocracy Institute
Research institute publishing governance methods for accountable deployment of AI agents.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

AI does not need legal personhood to acquire institutional power.
AI Verified source (Sep 5, 2026)

added 2d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Liina Vahtras
Managing Director at Estonia's e-Residency programme.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

AI agents cannot hold citizenship or legal personhood, but they can be linked to natural persons in legally sound ways.
AI Verified source (Sep 4, 2026)

added 8d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Anna Collard
SVP Content Strategy and CISO Advisor at KnowBe4 Africa.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Yet autonomy does not give an AI system legal personality. The law does not wait for an AI to ‘decide’ anything.
AI Verified source (Sep 2, 2026)

added 10d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
David B. Hoppe
Attorney at Gamma Law, writing on technology, contracts, and AI legal accountability.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

US law offers no legal personhood for AI systems. Every action an AI agent takes must be attributed to a human or corporate actor, even when the AI behaves unpredictably or beyond what the user or developer intended.
AI Verified source (Aug 14, 2026)

added 6d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Deborah A. DeMott
Duke Law professor and scholar of agency and fiduciary-duty law.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Some people argue for personhood for agentic AI, and then people like me ask, ‘Well, how would an AI buy liability insurance?’
AI Verified source (Jul 27, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Ott Velsberg
Estonian government chief data officer and public-sector AI governance official.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

It should not be about giving AI personhood, but about making AI agents identifiable, authorised, limited, auditable and accountable when they act on behalf of someone. AI agents should remain tools acting on behalf of humans, companies or public aut...
more AI Verified source (Jul 16, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Shruti Rajagopalan
Legal scholar and researcher writing on agentic AI, accountability, and governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

This Article argues that personhood is neither necessary nor sufficient, shifting the question from status to enforcement. [...] Bare personhood would supply a caption without a representative, assets, or a mechanism for cessation.
AI Verified source (Jul 16, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Nicola Fabiano
Legal scholar and author writing on AI Act compliance, human responsibility, and governance of agentic AI.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Technical autonomy does not create legal autonomy.
AI Verified source (Jul 10, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Allegis Law
U.S. law firm publishing analysis of artificial-intelligence law, governance, and legal personhood.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

No. Under current U.S. law, AI agents have no legal rights and no legal personhood. They are treated as tools or property. Any rights or obligations associated with the AI agent’s actions belong to the humans or legal entities that deploy them.
AI Verified source (Jul 9, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Rustin Diehl
U.S. attorney writing on AI agents, fiduciary duties, and legal personhood.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

AI agents currently hold no status under U.S. law. They are treated as property or tools, meaning any legal consequences of their actions flow to the human or entity that owns or deploys them.
AI Verified source (Jul 9, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Jesús A. Torrecilla-Pinero
Researcher at Universidad de Extremadura writing on AI governance, moral judgment, and meaningful human control.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

A non-person agent—regardless of architecture or scale—operates with categories: it receives them from training data, from designers, from previously formed human judgments encoded in the corpus, and within that inheritance it can interpolate, recomb...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
MIDAO
Organization providing legal-entity infrastructure and guidance for decentralized autonomous organizations and AI agents.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

AI agents act in the world, but the law does not recognize them as persons. Under every legal system operating today, there are two types of legal persons: natural persons (humans) and legal persons (corporations, LLCs, foundations). AI agents are ne...
more AI Verified source (Jul 2, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Baker McKenzie
International law firm publishing legal analysis on AI-agent accountability and regulation.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Emerging legal developments support the view that accountability generally runs to the humans and entities behind the agent.
AI Verified source (Jul 1, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Hugo Kruyne
Vice President and COO of Select Vantage Inc., writing on financial-market accountability and AI governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

AI and robots should not be granted legal personhood, particularly in finance. My reasoning was simple: financial markets depend on responsibility. If an AI trading engine violates rules, manipulates markets or causes harm, the question cannot be all...
more AI Verified source (Jun 26, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Mireille Hildebrandt
Professor of Law and Technology, writing on law, artificial intelligence, and legal personhood.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Attributing legal personhood to agentic AI systems will not necessarily solve the problems presented by these systems, while raising numerous new problems about their identification, definition, representation and about the accountability of those wh...
more AI Verified source (Jun 22, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Anton Sokolov
Researcher at Tyche Institute on accountable human-AI interaction and delegated agency.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

For digital government, the accountable unit should not be an artificial person, but a constrained delegation whose consequential actions leave reconstructable evidence.
AI Verified source (Jun 19, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Mark Brakel
Policy director, Future of Life Institute

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Under the status quo, AI systems are considered tools and the companies creating them are on the hook. This rightfully keeps humans accountable.
AI Verified source (Jun 19, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Randima Fernando
Center for Humane Technology co-founder

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Beyond the risks of anthropomorphization, a perception of consciousness opens the door to AI welfare; welfare opens the door to personhood and rights; and rights confer legal and moral protection, all while AI agents can process vastly more data and ...
more AI Verified source (Jun 12, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Martin Petrin
Corporate governance law professor

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

The paper argues that the appropriate response lies in [...] corporate liability [...] rather than in recognizing AI as a legal agent or person.
AI Verified source (Jun 8, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
People of Internet Research Team
Independent tech policy research team

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

This is not a pro-regulation complaint. It is an accountability complaint, and accountability is what makes markets work. Limited liability is a bargain: society grants it in exchange for a known owner who bears residual responsibility and whose iden...
more AI Verified source (Jun 7, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Loading more opinions...

More h/ai-regulation votes

Ban AI companion chatbots for minors under 18

Ban autonomous lethal weapons

Require human-in-the-loop oversight for agentic AI systems acting in high-stakes domains

AI companies should be liable for harms caused by their deployed models

Require all advanced AI chips to be registered and traceable to their physical location

Back