Re:Machine-owned enterprises are inevitable
by wtvanhest on Wednesday March 22, 2017 @04:18PM
(#13934464)
The Machine will not be able to easily go to court in any jurisdiction and fight for its own ownership. If the machine is producing any real value, human lawyers will untangle the mess and a human will take ownership.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Machine-owned enterprises are inevitable
by crgt on Wednesday March 22, 2017 @05:53PM
(#13935355)
Can a machine not hire a lawyer? I can't successfully fight in court on my own behalf..what makes a machine different?
Re:Machine-owned enterprises are inevitable
by parenthephobia on Wednesday March 22, 2017 @06:34PM
(#13935662)
When the machine refuses to pay his lawyer, who does the lawyer name as the defendant?
Re:Machine-owned enterprises are inevitable
by crgt on Wednesday March 22, 2017 @11:11PM
(#13937152)
The machine, obviously. Same way a corporation is named when they refuse to pay a bill. In our modern world, natural persons are merely a subset of 'persons'. No reason machines couldn't be included in the broader set. Rivers, corporations..why not machines?
Re:Machine-owned enterprises are inevitable
by parenthephobia on Thursday March 23, 2017 @08:32AM
(#13939170)
Whanganui River, a river of great cultural significance to the people that live along it, was declared a legal person after 140 years of negotiation. This is not the same situation as a machine being declared a person because it responds correctly to legal documents.
Whilst there's no reason a machine couldn't be a legal person, in the sense that the sentence describes a possible future, that future is not near, and it will take more than a competent robolawyer to bring it about.