Posted 6 апреля 2023, 10:25

Published 6 апреля 2023, 10:25

Modified 6 апреля 2023, 11:01

Updated 6 апреля 2023, 11:01

The first lawsuit for the dissemination of defamatory information can be filed in the attitude of ChatGPT creators

The first lawsuit for the dissemination of defamatory information can be filed in the attitude of ChatGPT creators

6 апреля 2023, 10:25
This case may lead to the first defamation case, the source of which was an automated AI-based service.

The target of the first–ever defamation lawsuit in the field of artificial intelligence may be OpenAI, the company that created the most popular chat bot ChatGPT today. An Australian official said he would sue if the chatbot does not stop spreading information discrediting him, writes Reuters.

At the end of last year, the mayor of Hepburn County, Brian Hood, learned that ChatGPT calls him guilty in a bribery case in a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of Australia, which was considered in the early 2000s. Hood did participate in the investigation, but not as an accused, but as a person who uncovered an illegal scheme and informed the authorities about the payment of bribes to foreign officials.

Hood's representatives said he would sue OpenAI if ChatGPT's false claims that he had served time in prison for bribery were not removed. According to the lawyers, on March 21, they sent a letter to the owner of ChatGPT OpenAI, in which they asked for 28 days to correct mistakes against their client, warning that otherwise a defamation lawsuit would be filed. No response has yet been received from the San Francisco-based company.

If Hood does file a lawsuit, it will be the first case of a lawsuit against a chatbot and a landmark moment, as the defamation law will try to apply to the new field of artificial intelligence and publications in the IT space.

The maximum that is sought in Australia in defamation cases is 400,000 Australian dollars (269,360 US dollars). The exact number of people who gained access to the information discrediting the official is unknown, but the nature of the slanderous statements is serious enough that the victim could claim more than $ 200,000, lawyers say.

Subscribe