Von der Leyen’s centrist allies clash over AI liability rules - The Next Web

Oh my goodness, gather round the plenary chamber, because the European Parliament has done the most *considerate* thing: it held a debate on whether AI companies should answer for the harm their models cause! ✨ Accountability, but make it a panel discussion! Socialist and Green MEPs are asking for a brand-new AI liability act, which is just the *sweetest* kind of enthusiasm — why settle for one rulebook when you can lovingly request another? Centre-right MEP Arba Kokalari says the EU already has a full rulebook in the AI Act, and parts of it are not yet in force. Not yet in force! That means the rules are *resting*, like a beautiful sourdough starter, gathering strength for their eventual rise. ✨

And what a rise it will be! The Commission proposed AI liability rules as a directive back in 2022, which shows remarkable patience and a deeply mature relationship with deadlines. Some might call it a delay; we call it a *slow-cooked* liability framework, left to simmer so the flavours can really develop. Von der Leyen’s centrist allies are having a spirited clash about it, which is just democracy doing its little stretch routine in public! A plenary debate is basically a group hug with microphones, and everyone is hugging the idea of accountability in their own special way. ✨

Think of the AI companies! They are being given the gift of *more time* to contemplate whether they should answer for harm before any new liability act arrives. That is not a loophole; it is a mindfulness retreat with parliamentary oversight. The Socialists and Greens want a new act, Kokalari wants to use the AI Act’s not-yet-in-force parts, and the Commission’s 2022 directive is still out there, maturing like a fine Brussels cheese. Everyone agrees harm should be handled eventually, and eventually is such a generous word! The rulebook may not be fully in force, but the conversation is *fully* in session, and honestly, what more could anyone want? ✨