Rights & Ethics

Person

Legal personhood, explicitly excluding AI systems under state law.

How the laws define this

Legal frameworks consistently agree that a person includes human beings and recognized legal entities—such as corporations, firms, companies, associations, or other state-recognized bodies—while explicitly excluding artificial intelligence to ensure legal rights and responsibilities remain with human or organizational entities. Where these instruments diverge is in the technical scope and specific terms of what they exclude from personhood. The AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act and Ohio HB 469 focus strictly on excluding artificial intelligence systems, with Ohio HB 469 excluding them for all purposes under Ohio law and the AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act emphasizing prohibitions against AI owning property or serving in corporate roles. By contrast, the act amending Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 1 establishes a broader exclusion, explicitly denying personhood not only to artificial intelligence but also to computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, and any type of machine.

Synthesised from the 3 statutory definitions below. Each one is quoted in full, with its source.

How jurisdictions differ

What is distinctive in each definition, binding law in force first.

Jurisdiction	Instrument	Status	What is distinctive
Tennessee, United States	AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 1, relative to certain conditions of personhood.	In Force	Explicitly lists exclusions as artificial intelligence, computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, or any type of machine, and includes corporations, firms, companies, or associations.
Ohio, United States	Ohio HB 469 - Declare artificial intelligence systems nonsentient and prohibit legal personhood	Proposed	Adds declaration of AI systems as nonsentient and assigns legal liability for AI harm to human owners, users, and developers.
Missouri, United States	AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act	Withdrawn	Prevents AI from owning property or serving in corporate roles, while placing full responsibility for AI harms on human owners and developers.

What it triggers

In Tennessee, this excludes artificial intelligence, computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, or any type of machine from legal personhood under state law.source
Under Ohio HB 469, this would bar AI systems from holding legal personhood or property rights and assign legal liability for AI harm to human owners, users, and developers.source
Under the Missouri AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act, this would have prevented AI from being granted legal personhood, rights, or capacities such as owning property or serving in corporate roles.source

Definitions (3)

A natural person or any entity recognized as having legal personhood under the laws of the state, explicitly excluding any AI system. This definition forms the basis for declaring AI non-sentient and preventing AI from being granted legal personhood, rights, or capacities such as owning property or serving in corporate roles.

AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility ActDefinition 1 of 3

Defined as a natural person or any entity recognized as having legal personhood under the laws of the state, explicitly excluding an AI system for all purposes under Ohio law. This distinction is critical for maintaining human oversight and accountability.

Ohio HB 469 - Declare artificial intelligence systems nonsentient and prohibit legal personhoodDefinition 2 of 3

As defined in Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 1-3-105(a), a 'person' includes a corporation, firm, company, or association. However, this definition now explicitly excludes artificial intelligence, computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, or any type of machine. This clarification ensures that legal rights and responsibilities remain with human or organizational entities.

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 1, relative to certain conditions of personhood.Definition 3 of 3

Not to be confused with

Legal Personhood

Legal personhood refers to the status enabling rights and duties, while person explicitly excludes AI systems from that status under these laws.

Nonsentient artificial intelligence system

A nonsentient artificial intelligence system is an AI legally declared to lack sentience, whereas person excludes such systems from legal personhood entirely.

Questions and answers

Does Tennessee law grant legal personhood to AI?

No, Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 1-3-105(a) explicitly excludes artificial intelligence, computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, or any type of machine from the definition of person. Legal rights and responsibilities remain with human or organizational entities.

What happens if Ohio HB 469 passes?

Ohio HB 469 would declare AI systems nonsentient and prohibit them from legal personhood or property rights under Ohio law. It would assign legal liability for AI harm to human owners, users, and developers.

Can AI own property under Missouri's AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act?

No, the Act explicitly excludes AI systems from legal personhood, preventing them from owning property or serving in corporate roles. It places full responsibility for AI harms on human owners and developers.