Comment by preommr

From the article (that I am sure you read):

> In Mirvahedy v Henley, the claimant was injured after the car he was driving was hit by the defendant’s horse. The horse had pushed over a wooden fence and an electric wire fence and bolted from its field after being frightened. This test was met here because, when a horse is sufficiently alarmed or panicked – ie in those particular circumstances – it is a known characteristic of a horse to bolt and cover long distances.

So, it's not just 'lions', but regular animals that people know can behave in a particular way.

I would say AI companies know the cybersecurity dangers since they literally advertise it as part of their marketing.

---

And as a tangent, it isn't simple if we're talking broadly - e.g. I don't think Anthropic should be liable for agents that are directed by a user to write code that takes part in a crime. Nor should they be held liable if their internal security measures are lax in a way that an employee steals data that gets distilled into another model. But we're not talking about those edge cases.