OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Liability rules for Artificial Intelligence – The Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD)

Justice and fundamental rights

In a Europe fit for the Digital Decade, victims should enjoy the same level of protection for damage caused by AI as by other technologies. Businesses should know their risks, get insured and prevent risks whenever possible.<br /> The AI Liability Directive proposal makes this possible by adapting civil liability rules to the challenges posed by the AI technology.<br /> The proposed directive will apply where AI-enabled products and services cause damage because AI providers, developers or users did something wrong. The proposed directive gives victims access to information about AI systems and introduces rebuttable presumptions to alleviate the victim’s burden of proof. <br /> It ensures that justified claims are not hindered by the specific difficulties of proof linked with AI.<br />

Links

Public consultation

ID: 13601

Lobbying Activity

52 responses

Consultation response

Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs, 22 Jul 2021

BEUC welcomes the possibility to give feedback on the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment on “Civil liability – adapting liability rules to the digital age and artificial intelligence”. BEUC recommends a comprehensive upgrade of the EU Product Liability Directive, which was adopted 36…

Microsoft Urges Technology-Neutral Approach to EU AI Liability Rules

Microsoft Corporation, 28 Jul 2021

Microsoft requests the Commission maintain technology-neutral liability rules rather than creating AI-specific regulations. They argue producers should not face heightened liability simply because products include AI components. The company advocates for evidence-based reform with real-world examples of harm before making major changes.
This would avoid deterring them from offering AI products to EU consumers.
Consumers lose stronger protections when AI systems cause unforeseen harm or injury.

European Automakers Oppose Reversing Burden of Proof in AI Liability Rules

Association des Constructeurs Européens d'Automobiles, 27 Jul 2021

ACEA requests that the burden of proof not be reversed in product liability cases. They argue the current Product Liability Directive is generally fit for purpose and covers AI-equipped products. They recommend non-binding guidance over new binding legislation.
This would prevent a surge in lawsuits and avoid financial burden on automakers.
Victims lose easier paths to compensation for damages from defective AI-equipped products.

EFPIA warns AI liability rules will stifle pharmaceutical innovation

European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, 28 Nov 2022

EFPIA urges the EU to maintain procedural safeguards requiring claimants to demonstrate fault and causation. They argue the current proposal creates a de facto reversal of the burden of proof. They also request that evidence disclosure be limited to readily available information.
This would reduce their compliance costs and protect them from expensive litigation.
Patients face higher drug prices and limited access to new medical therapies.

SMEunited seeks legal clarity on European AI liability rules

SMEunited aisbl, 28 Nov 2022

SMEunited wants rules to consider the resources of smaller economic actors. They argue the definition of AI remains unclear and demand consistency with other digital laws.
This approach would lower cross-border trade risks for small enterprises.
Tech developers face uncertainty regarding overlapping liability for connected devices.

Consultation response

Siemens AG, 28 Nov 2022

We welcome the ALD (AI Liability Directive) as being a directive and not a Regulation leaving the details of the liability regime to the Member States We also welcome the proposed fault-based regime (and that the EC does not entertain previous attempts to introduce strict liability for AI). We…

Consultation response

Siemens AG, 28 Jul 2021

Siemens welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment on adapting liability rules to the digital age and artificial intelligence. For many purposes, specifically in the industrial domain, AI is a powerful technology which helps to make our…

Consultation response

European Association Automotive Suppliers, 23 Jul 2021

CLEPA supports the goal of modernising liability rules to account for new technologies such as AI. However, any liability framework should strike a balance between efficiently protecting victims of damage while also granting leeway for the development of new technologies, services, and…

MedTech Europe warns AI liability rules risk stifling innovation

MedTech Europe, 28 Nov 2022

The group suggests merging the proposal with other laws to prevent legal confusion. They call for stronger protections for trade secrets and criticize broad proof requirements that burden defendants.
Medical device makers would reduce their legal exposure and safeguard their technical designs from competitors.
Injured parties lose easier access to technical evidence needed to prove liability in court.

Consultation response

MedTech Europe, 28 Jul 2021

MedTech Europe, the European trade association for the medical technology industry including diagnostics, medical devices and digital health welcomes the opportunity to provide comments on behalf of the medical technology industry to the European Commission on the Inception Impact Assessment…

French lobby MEDEF calls EU AI liability rules premature

Mouvement des Entreprises de France, 28 Nov 2022

MEDEF argues that adopting liability rules before the AI Act is finalized is premature. They demand that evidence disclosure procedures apply only to high-risk systems during formal legal proceedings.
This would protect trade secrets and reduce the legal risks faced by tech developers.
Damage victims lose easier access to evidence and face greater burdens of proof.

Consultation response

Huawei Technologies, 28 Jul 2021

Huawei welcomes the debate relating to artificial intelligence and the potential update of the relevant legislative framework. We are generally in favour of a stronger harmonization of the liability framework in the EU as it may help to spur investment in AI and improve Europe’s competitiveness…

Consultation response

Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft e.V., 28 Jul 2021

GDV welcomes the Commission’s examination of EU legislation on liability and product safety in the context of innovative digital and connected technologies. The PLD and national legislation are suitable and appropriate to address the risks posed by new digital technologies. They constitute a…

Consultation response

ITI - The Information Technology Industry Council, 28 Jul 2021

Please refer to the attached document for ITI's detailed comments to the Inception Impact Assessment.

Consultation response

The Danish Chamber of Commerce, 26 Jul 2021

We thank the Commission for the opportunity to reply to this important Inception Impact Assessment. The regulation on product safety and product liability is one of the key stones in protecting the European Consumers and creating and uphold a level playing field for operators in EU. The…

APPLiA warns AI liability directive targets a moving mark

APPLiA (Home Appliance Europe), 28 Nov 2022

APPLiA recommends turning the proposal into a Regulation to avoid national differences. They worry the directive depends on the AI Act, which remains unstable.
Uniform EU rules would reduce the burden of complying with different national laws.
The Single Market suffers when member states implement different versions of the rules.

Avaaz urges strict liability regime for all AI systems

Avaaz Foundation, 28 Nov 2022

The organization requests strict liability for all AI systems, removing requirements to prove fault. They argue current proposals create unfair hurdles compared to physical product liability and fail to match protections in the AI Act.
This would eliminate barriers preventing marginalized groups from seeking compensation for AI discrimination.
AI providers and users lose protection from liability when systems cause discriminatory harm.

BBVA demands stricter proof for AI liability claims

BANCO BILBAO VIZCAYA ARGENTARIA, 25 Nov 2022

BBVA wants claimants to prove specific damages and provide detailed economic calculations. They argue current wording breaks down traditional burden of proof obligations.
The bank would avoid legal uncertainty and unjustified demands for financial compensation.
Victims of AI malfunctions would face significant hurdles to obtain legal redress.

Consultation response

Business Software Alliance, 28 Jul 2021

BSA | The Software Alliance welcomes the opportunity to provide comments on the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment on adapting liability rules to the digital age and circular economy. Please find our submission attached.

German consumer group vzbv demands strict AI liability rules

Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband, 28 Nov 2022

The vzbv calls for the introduction of strict liability for AI systems to ensure consumers can realistically obtain compensation. They also advocate for mandatory insurance and the preservation of collective legal actions.
Consumers would find it much easier and cheaper to successfully sue for AI-related damages.
AI developers and manufacturers would face higher insurance costs and significantly increased liability risks.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Warns EU AI Liability Rules Risk Stifling Innovation

Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, 28 Nov 2022

The Chamber requests the EU reconsider key aspects of the proposed directive that create imbalances between claimants and defendants, particularly the presumption of causality and broad evidence disclosure requirements. They argue the proposal should preserve basic burden of proof protections and establish clearer standards for when presumptions apply.
This would reduce compliance burdens and protect U.S. businesses from costly litigation and liability exposure.
European consumers lose stronger protections for AI-related harm and easier paths to compensation.

Co-operative banks urge limits on AI liability evidence disclosure

European Association of Co-operative Banks, 28 Nov 2022

The EACB requests limiting evidence disclosure to protect trade secrets and sensitive banking data. They also oppose mandatory insurance and believe the directive should exclude non-high-risk AI systems.
Limiting disclosure prevents competitors or criminals from accessing sensitive internal datasets and security protocols.
Damage victims may struggle to prove liability if access to technical data is restricted.

Medical technology industry warns against new AI liability rules

European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and healthcare IT Industry, 28 Jul 2021

The organization requests that existing medical device regulations be recognized as sufficient for AI liability. They argue new rules would create a fragmented legal landscape and undermine sector-specific accountability frameworks already in place.
This would allow them to avoid additional compliance costs and legal uncertainty beyond existing medical device regulations.
Patients and consumers lose stronger protections if AI-specific liability gaps remain unaddressed by horizontal rules.

Consultation response

Liberty Global Corporate B.V., 28 Jul 2021

Liberty Global welcomes the opportunity to comment on the European Commission (EC)’s IIA of a possible initiative aimed at addressing a number of shortcomings identified in the evaluation of the Product Liability Directive 85/374/EEC (the Directive) and at those challenges posed by the circular…

La Poste group urges better alignment of EU AI rules

LA POSTE, 28 Nov 2022

La Poste calls for better articulation between regulations and clearer definitions for legal presumptions. They also want protections for information covered by professional and banking secrecy.
Stronger secrecy rules would help the group avoid disclosing sensitive banking information.
Victims of AI damage might find it harder to obtain necessary evidence.

German digital industry warns AI rules will stifle European innovation

ZVEI e.V. - Verband der Elektro- und Digitalindustrie, 28 Nov 2022

ZVEI maintains that existing laws already address liability gaps for AI applications. They claim the proposal de facto constitutes a reversal of the burden of proof. The group warns these rules would massively hinder AI development in Europe.
Rejecting the proposal avoids a massive expansion of liability proceedings and compliance costs.
Victims of AI damage would lose intended relief from their burden of proof.

Consultation response

ZVEI e.V. - Verband der Elektro- und Digitalindustrie, 28 Jul 2021

ZVEI welcomes the opportunity to provide input to the European Commission's Inception Impact Assessment on adapting liability rules to the digital age and artificial intelligence (AI). From a ZVEI point of view there is currently no reason for a fundamental revision of the Product Liability…

Consultation response

ACT | The App Association, 27 Jul 2021

Please find attached the feedback of ACT | The App Association (Transparency Reg. # 72029513877-54) to the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment for a legislative procedure to adapt liability rules to the digital age and circular economy. Anna Bosch EU Policy Associate ACT | The App…

Consultation response

Siemens Healthineers AG, 28 Jul 2021

Siemens Healthineers welcomes the opportunity to provide input to the Commission's plan to adapt the liability rules against the background of new technology developments and artificial intelligence (AI). From a Siemens Healthineers perspective, AI as a technology used in medical devices per se…

CSC Urges EU to Exempt Researchers from AI Liability

CSC – IT CENTER FOR SCIENCE LTD., 28 Nov 2022

CSC argues the EU should focus on technology-neutral regulation that targets societal impacts. They demand that rules only concern final products and services, excluding underlying research. Liability must remain solely with product developers rather than researchers sharing open-source components.
This protects research institutions from legal risks while promoting open-source data sharing.
Parties seeking damages from foundational research errors may face restricted legal recourse.

Eurocadres Urges Inclusion of Workers in AI Liability Rules

EUROCADRES - THE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFF, 25 Nov 2022

Eurocadres recommends postponing the consultation until the AI Act is finalized. They want workers included as claimants and a reversed burden of proof for systems.
Managers gain better legal standing and easier paths to compensation for workplace damages.
AI developers lose trade secret protections and face higher liability across all systems.

French insurers demand alignment of AI liability and safety rules

Fédération Française de l'Assurance, 28 Nov 2022

It is essential to ensure rules are perfectly coordinated with other texts. The federation wants to maintain contractual freedom and avoid a compulsory insurance obligation. The scope of evidence disclosure should be limited to high-risk AI systems.
This would reduce compliance costs and prevent insurers from covering unpredictable risks.
Victims of lower-risk systems lose simplified ways of proving damages under their proposals.

DEKRA urges including quality management systems in AI liability rules

DEKRA e.V., 8 Nov 2022

DEKRA suggests including Quality Management System requirements from the AI Act in the liability directive. They propose referencing Article 17 to ensure provider obligations following duty of care.
Expanded compliance requirements for quality systems create more demand for their certification services.
AI providers face easier liability claims if they lack robust quality management.

Future of Life Institute Urges Strict Liability for AI

Future of Life Institute, 28 Nov 2022

The institute calls for strict liability for high-risk and general-purpose systems to protect victims. They also propose reversing the burden of proof and including societal harms in damages.
This proposal would advance the organization’s goal of mitigating catastrophic risks from advanced technology.
AI developers lose legal protections as strict liability shifts the burden of risk to them.

Consultation response

Future of Life Institute, 28 Jul 2021

The Future of Life Institute (FLI) welcomes the opportunity to participate in this consultation on the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment on “Civil liability – adapting liability rules to the digital age and artificial intelligence”. FLI supports revising the Product Liability…

Consultation response

Irish Council for Civil Liberties, 28 Nov 2022

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) is Irelands oldest independent human rights monitoring organisation. We welcome the opportunity to respond to the consultation on the Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD). The AILD attempts to address the problems posed by artificial…

Consultation response

The Future Society, 28 Jul 2021

The Future Society (TFS) is a global nonprofit advancing the responsible adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the benefit of humanity. With a network of policy researchers and practitioners in the EU, the US and all over the world, we build understanding of AI and its impact, we build…

German Banking Committee warns AI liability rules stifle innovation

Die Deutsche Kreditwirtschaft, 28 Nov 2022

The group urges the EU to narrow the definition of AI and allow national flexibility. They also warn that proposed evidence disclosure rules lack protections against abusive litigation.
Avoiding new liability rules helps banks maintain current legal protections and lower costs.
Consumers may pay higher prices and lack uniform protection if definitions remain vague.

Developers Alliance warns AI liability rules will discourage European innovation

Application Developers Alliance, 28 Nov 2022

The group urges legislators to dismiss rebuttable presumptions and reject reversed burdens of proof. They demand strong protections for trade secrets and alignment with the AI Act.
Reducing legal risks and litigation costs would prevent a chilling effect on startups.
Claimants face higher barriers to proving fault and obtaining compensation for AI-related damages.

Consultation response

Science Europe, 20 Jul 2021

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already widely used across all sectors and in all parts of society and it bears a lot of potential for research, innovation, and the economy. Science Europe, the representation of major national research funding and performing organisations, welcomes the fact that…

Internet industry association eco warns against new AI liability rules

eco - Verband der Internetwirtschaft, 28 Nov 2022

The association suggests delaying the directive until the AI Act is finalized. They argue against including non-material damages and oppose shifting the burden of proof.
The proposal would lower operational costs for companies and safeguard their proprietary algorithms.
Victims of AI-driven discrimination would find it significantly harder to seek legal compensation.

Consultation response

France Assos Santé, 27 Jul 2021

France Assos Santé and its member associations – about 100 – especially represent patients and victims of pharmaceutical products. They all welcome the European Commission’s initiative aimed at revising the 1985 “PLD”, the limits of which they have denounced for years. However, they wish to share…

Consultation response

Center for Data Innovation, 28 Jul 2021

The Center for Data Innovation is pleased to respond to the European Commission’s request for feedback on adapting product liability to the digital age. Please see the enclosed document for our comments.

Consultation response

TomTom International bv, 28 Nov 2022

Considering the parallel cross-sectorial legislative proposal on liability (the revision of the product liability directive from 1985) and the potential overlap between these two pieces of legislation, TomTom would like to submit detailed comments on both files simultaneously during the PLD…

Consultation response

Fujitsu Technology Solutions B.V., 28 Jul 2021

Fujitsu acknowledges the efforts to critically review the legal frameworks that apply to innovative technologies such as AI. It is of high importance that both for developers, manufacturers and providers of such new technologies, as well as for the users or persons otherwise affected by these…

Consultation response

Upwork Inc., 28 Nov 2022

Upwork welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed AI Liability Directive and to engage constructively with the EU institutions going forward. At Upwork, we believe that, together with the proposed AI Act, the AI Liability Directive will both shape the future of Europes digital…

Consultation response

Eesti Infotehnoloogia ja Telekommunikatsiooni Liit, 27 Nov 2022

1. The scope of the proposal must be very clear. In our opinion, it is currently not possible to clearly understand from the proposal, whether the liability regulation contained in the proposal will apply only to the systems defined in the proposal for the artificial intelligence regulation (Ai…

Consultation response

Associazione Italiana Giovani Avvocati, 19 Nov 2022

L AIGA, Associazione Italiana Giovani Avvocati, ha da sempre visto con particolare favore ed interesse levoluzione in campo tecnologico dellapplicazione dellIntelligenza Artificiale, preoccupandosi di porsi come parte attiva nello stimolo al dibattito giuridico ad essa inerente, al fine di…

Consultation response

The European Young Bar Association, 28 Nov 2022

The European Young Bar Association (hereinafter EYBA or the Association) strongly supports the Authorities to embrace a regulation on AI systems and to approach it in a way that its balanced: facing the risks of a detrimental impact on human rights and democracy and at the same time taking into…

Consultation response

Women in Artificial Intelligence Austria, 28 Nov 2022

Women in AI Austria welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed AI Liability Directive. We commend the work of the European Commission in developing a framework for artificial intelligence and algorithmic systems. However, we would like to highlight some aspects which could merit further…

Consultation response

Associação Portuguesa para a Defesa do Consumidor, 28 Jul 2021

A. Context, Problem definition and Subsidiarity Check: We absolutely agree with the need to adapt the current legal liability regime to the digital age and the circular economy, since artificial intelligence (AI) will certainly contribute decisively in the transition to a circular economy. Indeed,…

Consultation response

, 28 Jul 2021

Amalyste is the French association for patients with Toxic Epidermal necrolysis (TEN) and Stevens-Johnson syndromes (SJS), which are rare and severe adverse reactions to drugs. They result in a detachment of the skin and mucous membranes, similar to a serious burn. Although official statistics are…