A man from Jiashan county, Zhejiang province, identified as Shi, is suing an artificial intelligence (AI) company after seeking its advice on an auspicious date for his mother's burial following her passing in April.
Shi and his family initially selected 20/4 after consulting a feng shui expert. However, Shi grew concerned because local customs deem even-numbered days inauspicious, and 20/4 marked the 4th day after his mother's passing. Seeking additional guidance, he turned to an AI chatbot.
The AI suggested 19/4 and advised burning paper horses and paper money before the funeral, a recommendation that seemed professional and culturally aware. Reassured, Shi proceeded. However, when he later inquired about the burial time, he received contradictory information.
The AI proposed 7-9 AM, yet simultaneously indicated that 19/4 was not an auspicious date.
By then, Shi had already informed relatives and finalized all arrangements, making it impossible to change the date. He proceeded as planned.
Shortly after the funeral, one relative of Shi's sustained serious injuries in a traffic accident. The specific timing of this incident was not disclosed.
Several family members attributed the accident to the burial date, believing it disrupted the family's feng shui and invited misfortune.
Shi contends that the AI provided misleading advice, exacerbating family tensions. He has filed a lawsuit against the AI company, seeking an apology and compensation.
Ironically, Shi utilized the same AI to assist in drafting his legal documents and outlining the litigation procedures.
In court, the defendant, Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology Company, argued that its terms of use explicitly state AI-generated content is for reference only and does not constitute professional advice.
The company added that users accept the service agreement by utilizing the software.
The company maintained that no online copyright infringement had occurred.
Shi countered, arguing that the agreement unfairly shifts responsibility to users, provides inadequate warnings, and lacks thorough consideration of the AI's information sources.
The case is currently being heard this week, with no resolution yet reached.
Hai Thu (Source: SCMP)
