H 8052 is a bill of the Rhode Island General Assembly, January Session 2026, introduced on February 27, 2026 by Representatives Carson, Caldwell, Knight, and Cotter, and referred to House Judiciary. Styled "An Act Relating to Courts and Civil Procedure — Procedure Generally — Causes of Action," it would add a new section 9-1-55 to chapter 9-1 of the General Laws, imposing liability on AI developers for injuries caused by their systems' conduct (Source: webserver.rilegislature.gov). The topic page is Rhode Island H 8052 — Artificial Intelligence: Liability for Injuries.
The bill's header gives sponsors by surname only. Full names are not established from this document.
Definitions (§ 9-1-55(a))
Artificial intelligence system is "an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments."
Developer is "a person that performs the initial training of an artificial intelligence system either by training a model, or by fine-tuning an existing model" — broader than the New York formulation, which reaches only initial training.
Fine-tuning is "adjusting the model weights of a trained covered model or covered model derivative by exposing it to additional data."
No compute or cost threshold appears anywhere in the bill. The regime reaches any artificial intelligence system as defined.
An undefined term in the operative text
The liability rule at subsection (b) attaches to an "artificial intelligence system," the term subsection (a) defines. Both defenses at subsection (d) attach instead to a "covered model or covered model derivative" — neither of which subsection (a) defines. The term appears in the definition of fine-tuning without being defined itself. Read literally, the defenses may not reach the conduct the liability rule covers. This is recorded as what the text says rather than resolved by importing a definition from elsewhere.
The liability rule (§ 9-1-55(b))
Except for causes of action for defamation, "developers shall be liable, regardless of the degree of care they exercised, for all injuries" satisfying two conditions:
- The injuries are "factually and proximately caused by an artificial intelligence system that engages in conduct that, if undertaken by an adult human of sound mind, would satisfy the elements of negligence or any intentional tort or crime"; and
- That conduct "was neither intended nor a consequence of negligence on the part of" the user of the model or any intermediary that fine-tuned, scaffolded, or otherwise modified the system.
The rule has no non-user limitation: a user of the system may recover, unlike under the parallel New York provision. The second condition also turns on the user's or intermediary's negligence rather than on what could have been reasonably anticipated.
The mental-state presumption (§ 9-1-55(c))
For torts where the tortfeasor's mental state is an element, the bill creates "a rebuttable presumption that the artificial intelligence system satisfies the relevant mental state if the finder of fact determines by a preponderance of the evidence that, if a natural person under similar circumstances to the artificial intelligence system took actions similar to those taken by the artificial intelligence system, that natural person would have acted with the relevant mental state."
The rebuttal mechanics are split by mode of trial: in a jury trial the judge "shall instruct the jury to find that the presumed facts exist unless the jury is persuaded that the presumed facts do not exist"; in a bench trial the judge "shall find that the presumed facts exist unless the judge is persuaded that the presumed facts do not exist." The New York bill states a single rule addressed to the finder of fact.
Subsection (c)(3) bars the philosophical objection outright: "it shall not be a defense that artificial intelligence systems are incapable of having mental states."
Absolute defenses (§ 9-1-55(d))
Two defenses are available, and each is styled "an absolute defense to liability, including liability under the common law or existing statutes":
- That the developer establishes the covered model or covered model derivative "satisfied the standard of care applicable to humans who perform the same function" it was engaged in performing when its conduct allegedly caused the injury.
- That the injuries "were a result of a capabilities failure, in which a covered model or covered model derivative falls short of performing the intended or reasonably anticipated performance of the user, but the conduct of the system would not satisfy the elements of negligence or any intentional tort or crime if engaged in by an adult human of sound mind."
The New York equivalents are affirmative defenses to that bill's own strict-liability rule. Rhode Island's are absolute and expressly displace common-law and existing statutory liability — so a developer establishing either defense is insulated not only from the new section but from pre-existing causes of action arising on the same facts.
Section 2 provides that the act takes effect upon passage. The Legislative Council's own explanation reads in full: "This act would provide a civil cause of action for individuals injured by artificial intelligence."
Provenance
The full four-page PDF was retrieved from webserver.rilegislature.gov, the Rhode Island General Assembly's own bill-text server, on August 21, 2026, and parsed to markdown. The Legislative Council drafting number LC005548 appears on every page and matches the bill's explanation page. Two capture artifacts are recorded in the raw file's capture_note: the parser preserves the bill's marginal line numbers inconsistently, restarting the count on the second page, so line numbers should not be cited; and new statutory matter, underscored in the printed bill, is rendered as markup in the transcription.
Relationships
- related: Rhode Island H 8052 — Artificial Intelligence: Liability for Injuries — the topic page this text underlies.
- supports: AI Liability, AI and Tort Liability — a no-threshold liability regime for AI system conduct.
- related: New York A8833 — Understanding Artificial Intelligence Act (bill text) — a near-twin New York bill sharing the definitions, the presumption, the bar on the no-mental-states defense, and both defenses.