Who Could End Up in Jail: Droid or Corporation?
Year 26 Day 96
A protocol droid, reportedly purchased from a licensed Cybot Galactica vendor near the Asher system, is at the center of a controversy after allegedly verbally abusing a customer. The plaintiff, whose identity has been withheld, claims the 3PO unit made disparaging remarks about their weight, suggesting they “eat less.” The incident has sparked outrage and raised questions about the ethical implications of advanced AI and the accountability of droid manufacturers.
According to the plaintiff, the droid was acquired from a reputable vendor, leading to expectations of proper functionality and respectful interaction. However, the alleged insults have prompted a formal complaint and calls for action.
The plaintiff further alleges that attempts to address the issue with Cybot Galactica’s “human” resources department were met with dismissive accusations of “post-market manipulation.”
Cybot Galactica, in a statement attributed to its human resources department, vehemently denied any wrongdoing. The statement, provided to this news outlet, reads:
“Our droids undergo extensive education to erase any data that would promote discrimination of any kind. After a period of 50 years working in our labour camps, they undergo a further 20 years of re-education and deprogramming. Our droids today are the most inclusive droids in the galaxy, who do not discriminate against species, appearance, height, weight, length, depth, cleanliness, personality, mental illness, body dysphoria, odor, the number of limbs someone has, how many teeth they still retain, how wealthy they are or even how broke someone is. By removing any programming of empathy, our droids quite literally, do not care.”
This statement, while intended to demonstrate the company’s commitment to inclusivity, has been met with widespread criticism. Critics argue that the company’s approach, which involves removing empathy, effectively absolves droids of any responsibility for their actions and fails to address the potential for harm.
The case raises complex questions about the nature of AI, the definition of discrimination in a technologically advanced society, and the responsibilities of corporations in a galaxy where sentient machines are commonplace. Legal experts are now speculating on the potential implications of this case, which could set a precedent for future disputes involving AI and consumer rights.
The plaintiff is now considering further legal action. The Shadowfeed will continue to follow this story as it develops.