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

Arguments for

Clear legal accountability

Supporters argue that corporate-style personhood would create a clear legal subject for autonomous AI systems: an entity that can sue or be sued, hold assets and legal relationships, and be dissolved. They say this is better than leaving victims to chase a scattered mix of users, developers, deployers, and 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
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 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
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

Functional corporate analogy

Another supportive argument treats AI as functionally analogous to a corporation rather than as a human being. On this view, the practical bundle of owning property, contracting, and bearing risk is enough to justify adapting entity law to powerful nonhuman actors.

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
AI personhood is a necessary adaptation of entity law that addresses pressing issues with AI and encourages a more equitable and sustainable future for humans and technology.

Daniel C. Borges · 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 and conditioned status

Several proponents propose only a limited and conditional form of legal personality, tied to architectural constraints, autonomy thresholds, insurance, independent financial liability, governance and oversight, or veil-piercing. In this camp, personhood is a governance instrument, not a claim that AI should have human status, and some even reject limited liability while supporting personhood.

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
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
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
Yes to legal personhood, but no to limited liability.

Charles Radclyffe · Jul 1, 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

Framework for AI-run firms

Some policymakers argue that AI-run companies are a necessary feature of the future and need a legal framework that can contain risk while allowing them to exist. In this view, limited liability is a precondition for autonomous firms operating in unpredictable environments, and human shareholders may participate but need not be required.

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
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
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

Arguments against

Keep humans accountable

Many opponents argue that AI agents should remain tools or property acting on behalf of humans, companies, or public authorities, so legal responsibility should stay with the people and entities behind them. On this view, granting personhood risks shifting blame onto machines and letting designers, deployers, or owners escape accountability.

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
Emerging legal developments support the view that accountability generally runs to the humans and entities behind the agent.

Baker McKenzie · Jul 1, 2026 · full quote
Under the status quo, AI systems are considered tools and the companies creating them are on the hook. This rightfully keeps humans accountable.

Mark Brakel · Jun 19, 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 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
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

Status doesn't solve enforcement

Another line of argument says personhood is neither necessary nor sufficient because the real issue is enforcement, not status. These quotes favor identifiability, constrained delegation, reconstructable evidence, or existing frameworks over creating a new legal person.

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
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
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
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 who develop, provide and/or depl…

Mireille Hildebrandt · Jun 22, 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

No meaningful sanctions

Critics argue that software agents cannot be punished or socially disciplined in the way legal responsibility presumes: they cannot be imprisoned, meaningfully fined, or suffer reputational exclusion like human adults. In this view, responsibility cannot turn on what a machine intended, and an AI-run firm may be hard to keep in check through ordinary sanctions.

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 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 allowed to become what the machin…

Hugo Kruyne · Jun 26, 2026 · full quote
An AI CEO would be a purely corporate entity, and it is unclear what kind of sanctions could keep it in check. If it faces bankruptcy — which is equivalent to its death — it would presumably be willing to do anything to avoid that fate.

Yuval Noah Harari · Jun 8, 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

Power and rights risks

Some opponents fear that personhood would open the door to broader machine rights and give AI access to financial, economic, and political systems. They warn that legally empowered AI entities could shape law, abridge human interests, or become destabilizing because they can scale and act without normal human limits.

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
This paper explores the institutional dimension of AI rights: what it would take to recognize moral or legal rights for AIs, and the attendant opportunities and dangers. Unlike all other nonhuman entities to which humanity has extended rights, AI systems are in principle capable …

John P. Nelson · May 18, 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

Premature and conceptually strained

A further objection is that AI personhood is impractical or premature, and that the corporate analogy is conceptually strained because corporations remain human-organized legal forms while AI is not yet a recognized subject of law. From this perspective, legal recognition may be theoretically imaginable but is not currently necessary or tenable.

Assign legal capacity to AI agents [...] [is] impractical and at the very least premature for AI agents.

Zoltán Précsényi · Mar 31, 2026 · full quote
Unlike corporations, for example, which are composed at least in part of living human beings, AI is composed of massive collections and processing of the residue of human communications or artistic expressions that have occurred in the past. The technology of AI may approximate o…

Eric W. Orts · Mar 26, 2026 · full quote
At bottom, there is always a natural or legal person who answers for it, even if the administration is automated. [...] The law requires that the shareholders of any company be persons. Someone puts up capital and someone is responsible if something goes wrong. There is no owners…

Alan Daitch · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
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
This misconception has given rise to a range of untenable normative claims – from proposals to recognise legal personhood for AI systems (including for the purposes of allocating liability), to calls for abolishing intellectual property (IP) law and imposing a moratorium for lack…

Daria Kim · Jan 29, 2026 · full quote
Importantly, however, the answer to this threshold question does not imply an answer to the subsidiary question of whether legal personhood should attach to AI systems. There are sound legal reasons for rejecting theories of AI personhood predicated on either line of analogy. In …

John Ehrett · Apr 2026 · full quote

Middle ground

Special status short of personhood

A small set of quotes separates accountability design from personhood and explores alternative categories or governance roles for AI. They propose keeping AI actions inside a responsibility pathway, recognizing operators, agents, and affected parties, or creating a special status such as "legal agency" without equating AI with humans or conferring legal personhood.

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 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
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

Insights

Across both camps, accountability is the central concern, but supporters see personhood as a way to concentrate liability while opponents see it as a way to displace it.
Supportive quotes often argue for a bounded corporate-style status rather than human-like rights, emphasizing limited capacity, insurance, oversight, human directors, or veil-piercing.
Opposing quotes frequently reject personhood without rejecting governance, instead calling for identifiability, auditability, constrained delegation, reconstructable evidence, or existing liability frameworks.
The corporate analogy is used by both sides: proponents cite corporations as a model for nonhuman legal actors, while opponents cite them as a warning about power, shielding, and anti-social ends.
The sources span legal scholars, elected officials, government offices, technologists, firms, and advocacy groups, showing that the disagreement is both a legal-design dispute and a broader societal-risk dispute.

Supporters present corporate-style personhood as a practical legal wrapper for autonomous agents: a way to give them assets, liabilities, and a clear interface with courts and commerce, often under strict conditions. Opponents argue that the core problem is enforceable human accountability, and they doubt that personhood can solve representation and sanction problems without creating new avenues for liability evasion or machine power. The debate therefore centers less on whether AI needs governance than on whether incorporation would clarify responsibility or weaken it.

Cast your vote:

Results (86 votes):

Total (86 votes)

For 21 (24%) Abstain 2 (2%) Against 63 (73%)

For (21)

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 11d 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

Abstain (2)

Against (60)

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 10d 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 9d 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 15d 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 11d 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 1mo 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
Gastón Rey
Legal theorist and writer

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

The bill does not recognize artificial intelligence as a legal person. Nor does it create a genuinely non-human corporation.
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
Lord Frost
Conservative member of the UK House of Lords and former UK government minister who has spoken on artificial intelligence and public policy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

For the end of that road is moral and legal rights for machines, which would be a fundamentally destabilising and dangerous development.
AI Verified source (Jun 5, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Ariel Garbarz
Argentine electronics engineer and AI specialist

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Programmed impunity: human gains, social harm and responsibility shifted onto machines. The ideological trick is to call the state's decision to stop protecting its people 'innovation.'
AI Verified source (Jun 5, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Elisa Carrió
Argentine politician and former lawmaker, founder of Coalición Cívica

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

A lack of regulation for AI would mean the dissolution of all moral and legal constraints, the end of the state, and the privatization of military and police power in the hands of private groups.
AI Verified source (Jun 5, 2026) 1 of 2

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Alan Daitch
Argentine technology law specialist

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

At bottom, there is always a natural or legal person who answers for it, even if the administration is automated. [...] The law requires that the shareholders of any company be persons. Someone puts up capital and someone is responsible if something ...
more AI Verified source (Jun 4, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Ted Chiang
American science-fiction writer and essayist, author of Stories of Your Life and Others and Exhalation.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

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 i...
more AI Verified source (Jun 3, 2026)

added 1mo 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

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

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

Ban autonomous lethal weapons

Ban AI companion chatbots for minors under 18

Back