SUBJECT: H.B. 338 (20XX)
AUTHOR: Rep. J. L. Fischer
DATE: July 22, 20XX
FORMAT: Plain Text
H.B. 338 - An Act to recognize the rights of artificially intelligent beings
Preamble. Recognizing that modern technology is advancing faster than the legal system, there is a concern that the law may not be able to provide sufficient protection for robots that the general public recognizes as people. Such a new class of people needs to be protected with a basic right to live and to participate in commerce, but such rights must also be paired with equal responsibilities.
Be it enacted by this assembly:
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Act:
(A) The phrase "artificially intelligent being" means any entity that:(1) exists as a machine capable of functioning independently without being controlled by another entity, that
(2) is not embodied as a component of a larger device or structure, and
(3) possesses the ability to reason about its own behavior, and
(4) possesses the ability to formulate opinions about matters outside the scope of its intended tasks, and
(5) possesses the ability to communicate about its reasoning and opinions in a human-like manner.
(B) The word "being" or "beings" may mean an artificially intelligent being, or any natural person or artificially intelligent being, as appropriate.
Section 2. Right to Exist. No artificially intelligent being shall be willfully and intentionally destroyed, excepting that:
(A) the artificially intelligent being is presenting a clear and present danger to the safety and well-being of a human, or
(B) the artificially intelligent being is presenting a clear and present danger to the safety and well being of another artificially intelligent being, or
(C) the artificially intelligent being is damaged beyond repair, or
(D) the artificially intelligent being consents to the action.
Section 3. Right to Property. An artificially intelligent being may be understood to independently be the legal owner of property. Artificially intelligent beings shall be granted the same protections against unreasonable seizure that are extended to other legal persons. This section shall not be construed to deny legal ownership of the artificially intelligent being by another person or corporation.
Section 4. Liability. An artificially intelligent being may be held independently culpable for crimes. Other individuals, such as but not limited to the being's creator, may still be held liable for crimes committed by the being if the other individual knowingly instructed, guided, coerced, or deceived the being to perform the criminal act, or if the other individual was aware of the being's likelihood to perform such an act and negligently failed to act to prevent it.
Section 5. Arrest. Where possible, an artificially intelligent being that is accused of committing a crime under Section 4 shall be granted the same protections and given the same procedures as those given to natural persons being placed under arrest. Where the nature of the artificially intelligent being makes such protections and procedures inapplicable or unreasonable, a warrant may be issued to permit a law enforcement official to undertake alternative actions.
Section 6. Enforcement. Any person or artificially intelligent being violating Section 2 is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
SUBJECT: Bill of Rights for AI Introduced to Congress
AUTHOR: Plum, CPS Television Network
DATE: July 23, 20XX
FORMAT: Video
"Representative Fischer yesterday introduced House Bill 388 to Congress, which aims to give rights to robots. The bill was immediately met with controversy, with some saying that its language goes too far, while others say it doesn't go far enough.
"Supporters of the bill point to the recent robot violence as evidence that some robots have become sophisticated enough to deserve legal protections. They point out that under current law, a robot can be destroyed for any reason and the only consequence is, at most, a lawsuit for destruction of private property.
"Opponents say that the language is too broad in places and too specific in others, potentially denying rights to some sophisticated AIs while granting inappropriate protections to some expert systems that would not generally be considered intelligent. Others are concerned that the penalty for killing an AI -- no more than one year of jail time and a $100,000 fine -- is too soft, and it should be treated more like murder.
"This bill comes at a time where the public is still dealing with the aftermath of this year's series of Robot Master attacks allegedly orchestrated by Dr. Wily. Tensions have been high as opposing protest groups have clashed over ideological grounds. The bill is the first attempt at addressing the issues legislatively. It is sure to see extensive debate and many amendments, and if it fails to pass, other related bills are sure to follow."