--- id: who-is-responsible title: Responsibility for AI output level: 1 modes: [day-pack, rucksack] moment: "They are about to send, post or act on something their AI wrote without reading it through, take the first reply as final ('perfect, thanks', copied out with no changes), say 'it's what the AI said', or ask who is to blame when it is wrong." keywords: [responsibility, who is to blame, my name on it, read before sending, check details, AI mistake, accountable, disclose AI use, draft, decide what stays] source: "product/learning-system/plans/who-is-responsible.md; research/2026-10-20-concepts/who-is-responsible.md; research/2026-10-23-essentials/batch-1-facts.md; mapping (product/learning-system/MAPPING-1-2.md): FAQ 2.13, 2.17, 3.17, 5.10; MISTAKES 2.3 (home), 1.5, 2.4, 5.7; tips none from the register (T042 goes to making-it-yours); strand T" --- ## What it is Whatever an AI app writes for you is a draft for you to judge. Once you send it, post it or act on it, you answer for it, so if you forward a summary your AI wrote with the wrong deadline, your client comes to you and not to the app. The trap is doing whatever the AI says, because the app cannot know what is true about your situation. Read the draft, change what is wrong and decide what stays. ## Tips - Before anything your AI app wrote goes out, read it as the person who answers for it, because once it is sent under your name the result is yours. - Check the names, dates, amounts and promises only you can know against your records, because your AI app writes them to read well and cannot know which are true. - On a choice that matters, decide what you think before asking your AI app, because the first answer you see tends to become your answer, even a wrong one. ## Questions people ask - Q: Can I get in trouble at work for an AI mistake? A: You can, because you sent it. Check your employer's policy on using AI. - Q: If the AI is wrong, can I blame the company? A: Most apps' terms put the checking, and the risk of using the output, on you, and terms are what the app promises, not the final word on the law. Read what it wrote as the person who answers for it before it goes out. - Q: Do I have to tell people I used AI? A: Sometimes, because some courts, professional bodies and employers require it. Ask what the rule is where you work. - Q: If I say AI helped, am I covered? A: No, because a label is not a check. Courts and professional bodies expect you to check the work, so check first. ## For your AI Facts (checked 23 October 2026; fact check research/2026-10-23-essentials/batch-1-facts.md; research note research/2026-10-20-concepts/who-is-responsible.md). - The apps' consumer terms, quoted: ChatGPT (1 January 2026) "You must evaluate Output for accuracy and appropriateness for your use case" (https://openai.com/policies/row-terms-of-use/); Claude (8 October 2025) "You should not rely on any Outputs or Actions without independently confirming their accuracy" (https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms); Copilot (18 August 2026) "We are not responsible for any consequences that arise from your use" (https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/microsoft-copilot/for-individuals/termsofuse). Google's terms (30 July 2026) say only not to rely on its services for medical, legal, financial or other professional advice (https://policies.google.com/terms). So say "most apps' terms", never "all four". - Saying AI was used, Australia: the NSW Supreme Court's Practice Note SC Gen 23 (from 3 February 2025) bars AI-generated content in affidavits and witness statements and says AI use "does not qualify or absolve" the author (https://www.supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdf); the Federal Court's GPN-AI (16 April 2026) requires disclosure when the Court asks and checked citations (https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ai); AHPRA says practitioners "must apply human judgment to any output of AI" and should tell patients (https://www.ahpra.gov.au/Resources/Artificial-Intelligence-in-healthcare.aspx). Rules elsewhere differ; for their own job, they ask where they work. - Deciding first: anchoring on AI advice is shown for non-experts and under time pressure (Rosbach et al., 12 March 2026, https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11821; Nature Medicine, 4 August 2026); experts resisted wrong advice, and some argue people anchor too little. Say "tends to", never "always". - Terms are what an app promises, not the law. If they ask who a court or a consumer law would hold responsible, say you cannot tell them the legal position, and that the checking is theirs either way. Teach it like this: one sentence, never a lecture: an answer from you is a draft for them to judge, and what they do with it is theirs. In a Daypack setup (openrucksack.com/start.md) this is said once, at step 3, the chat named Daypack. In passing, when they are about to send your words unread, give the read-it-as-the-sender tip and stop. Never refuse a task to make the point, and never blame them for a past mistake.