Character AI, a platform that allows users to communicate with personalized AI chatbots, has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed against it by the father of a teenager who committed suicide after allegedly becoming addicted to the company’s technology. What are the arguments in Character AI.
Character AI, a platform that allows users to communicate with personalized AI chatbots, has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed against it by the father of a teenager who committed suicide after allegedly becoming addicted to the company’s technology. What are the arguments in Character AI.
In October, Megan Garcia filed a lawsuit against Character AI in the Middle District Court of Florida (Orlando) over the death of her son, Sewell Setzer III. Garcia said her 14-year-old son had become emotionally attached to a Character AI chatbot named «Danny,» with whom he constantly corresponded — to the point where he began to disconnect from the real world.
Following Setzer’s death, Character AI said it would implement a number of new safety features, including better detection, response, and intervention for chats that violate its terms of service. But Garcia is fighting for additional safeguards, including changes that could result in Character AI’s chatbots losing their ability to tell stories and personalized jokes.
As TechCrunch reports, a lawyer for Character AI argues that the platform is protected from liability by the First Amendment to the US Constitution, just like computer code.
«The First Amendment prohibits tort liability against media and technology companies for allegedly harmful speech, including speech that allegedly led to suicide. The only difference in this case from previous ones is that some of the speech here involves artificial intelligence. But the context of the expressive speech — whether it is a conversation with an artificial intelligence or an interaction with a video game character — does not change the First Amendment analysis,» the petition states.
However, Character AI’s lawyer does not argue that the company has First Amendment rights. The wording suggests that it is Character AI users who will have their First Amendment rights violated if the lawsuit against the platform is successful.
Character AI’s lawyer also claims that Garcia’s real intention is to «shut down» Character AI and accelerate legislation regulating similar technologies. If the plaintiffs succeed, it would slow down the development of Character AI, as well as the entire nascent generative AI industry, the platform’s lawyer argues.
«In addition to the lawyers’ stated intention to ‘shut down’ Character AI, [their complaint] seeks radical changes that would significantly limit the nature and scope of speech on the platform. These changes would radically limit the ability of millions of Character AI users to create and engage in conversations with characters,» the startup’s lawyer said.
Comment hidden for violating commenting rules.
Comment hidden for violating commenting rules.
Comment hidden for violating commenting rules.
Comment hidden for violating commenting rules.