Firstly, this case exemplifies how problematic large language models can be. These systems, while capable of generating useful and creative content, cannot reliably distinguish fact from fiction. They can invent dates, facts, and figures, which can mislead users and, in some cases, cause harm. In this case, ChatGPT provided a user with completely fabricated information on three separate occasions, about a real legal case. Had Riehl published the information he received, it would undoubtedly have caused significant damage to his and his Publisher’s journalistic reputation, whilst also damaging the reputation of Walters, a public figure. 

Riehl sought to validate the information with more reliable sources before he took any action, but it’s entirely foreseeable that a less vigilant user would place total reliance on AI responses when making important decisions such as  investments, legal decisions or contractual negotiations. OpenAI does include a disclaimer on ChatGPT’s homepage warning that the system “may occasionally generate incorrect information,” but the company also presents ChatGPT as a source of reliable data. This discrepancy raises questions about the ethical responsibilities of AI developers and the need for clearer guidelines and regulations in the field.

Secondly, this case tests the boundaries of defamation law in the context of AI. (link to defamation doc on separate page). In the UK, defamation has evolved through the common law. Although the tort can be engaged through various forms, be it in the familiar form of spoken word or written text, or the more niche examples of art, songs or plays, the law to date has one thing in common – the defamatory statement  is ultimately made by a human. The concept of an AI model creating a defamatory statement poses several novel questions: are such statements actionable under the current law? If so, where does liability fall?

Should this case proceed to trial, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for the future of AI and its legal status. It could set a precedent for how AI developers are held accountable for the actions of their creations, and could influence the development of regulations and standards in the AI industry. As AI continues to evolve and become more integrated into our daily lives, it is crucial that we continue to scrutinise and address these legal and ethical challenges.