However, the academic and public discussions continue as AI software becomes more sophisticated and companies are increasingly implementing artificial intelligence to assist in all aspects of business and society.
This leads to some scholars to wonder whether AI should be granted legal personhood as it is not unthinkable to one day have a sophisticated algorithm capable of managing a firm completely independent of human interventions.
[1]Sherer (2018) argues – after conducting an analysis on New York's (and other states’) LLC law(s), the Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act (RULLCA) and US case law on fundamentals of legal personhood – that this option is not viable, but agrees with Bayern on the existence of a ‘loophole’ whereby an AI system could “effectively control a LLC and thereby have the functional equivalent of legal personhood”.
In corporations, this sort of situations is often prevented by formal provisions in the statutes (predominantly for voting rights for shares), however, such limitations do not seem to be in place for LLCs as they are more flexible in arranging control and organization.
Guernsey has granted (limited) rights to electronic agents[11] and Malta is currently busy creating a robot citizenship test.
[12] While it is unlikely the EU would allow for AI to receive legal personality at this moment, the European Parliament did however request the European Commission in a February 2017 resolution to “creating a specific legal status for robots in the long run, so that at least the most sophisticated autonomous robots could be established as having the status of electronic persons responsible for making good any damage they may cause, and possibly applying electronic personality to cases where robots make autonomous decisions or otherwise interact with third parties independently”.
[18] Giving (limited) legal personality to AI or even allow certain forms of algorithmic entities might create an extra edge.