>
>The reason why this isn't the case is evolutionary: a robot is merely
>a highly complex machine, and machines are merely tools. Who'd ever
>consider a highly advanced spanner to be its own person, after all?
>Utena, Corwin, Kayte and the rest are simply of a different mindset:
>it thinks for itself, ergo "it's life, Jim, but not as we know it, not
>as we know it, not as we know it, Captain"
>
I believe that the owner being responsible for the actions of his machines is part of the common law anyway. Turing law only applies to sufferage and recongintion of senience... something which some people won't want to do anyway.

PS. "There's Kilngons of the starbord bow, starbord bow, starbord bow. THerese klingons of the starbord bow, starborad bow, sir!"

___________________

Vaughn doesn't know I exist. I guess this explains why the rest of reality keeps ignoring me as well. >_<