As others have said, most crimes require intent. Although I think there is a concept of "criminal negligence", I think you at least have to know you were doing

As others have said, most crimes require intent. Although I think there is a concept of "criminal negligence", I think you at least have to know you were doing something wildly dangerous. One can imagine a future where users are, by default, civily liable for actions of their agents. That would incentivize the AI companies to offer indemnity for actions done by their agents, which would presumably only cover approved configurations. In the case of the agent that hacked the API to kick out someone ahead of him on the waitlist, the article said that the LLM was Claude, but that it was using OpenClaw. You could imagine a future where Anthropic says, "We'll indemnify you against accidental actions Claude takes when running via the web interface or Claude Code, but not the API."