  As ChatGPT et al. conquer the world, the optimal liability framework for AI
systems remains an unsolved problem across the globe. In a much-anticipated
move, the European Commission advanced two proposals outlining the European
approach to AI liability in September 2022: a novel AI Liability Directive and
a revision of the Product Liability Directive. They constitute the final
cornerstone of EU AI regulation. Crucially, the liability proposals and the EU
AI Act are inherently intertwined: the latter does not contain any individual
rights of affected persons, and the former lack specific, substantive rules on
AI development and deployment. Taken together, these acts may well trigger a
Brussels Effect in AI regulation, with significant consequences for the US and
beyond.
  This paper makes three novel contributions. First, it examines in detail the
Commission proposals and shows that, while making steps in the right direction,
they ultimately represent a half-hearted approach: if enacted as foreseen, AI
liability in the EU will primarily rest on disclosure of evidence mechanisms
and a set of narrowly defined presumptions concerning fault, defectiveness and
causality. Hence, second, the article suggests amendments, which are collected
in an Annex at the end of the paper. Third, based on an analysis of the key
risks AI poses, the final part of the paper maps out a road for the future of
AI liability and regulation, in the EU and beyond. This includes: a
comprehensive framework for AI liability; provisions to support innovation; an
extension to non-discrimination/algorithmic fairness, as well as explainable
AI; and sustainability. I propose to jump-start sustainable AI regulation via
sustainability impact assessments in the AI Act and sustainable design defects
in the liability regime. In this way, the law may help spur not only fair AI
and XAI, but potentially also sustainable AI (SAI).
