Maryland House Bill HB589

Maryland 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/25
• Refer: 1/23/25

Caption

Artificial Intelligence - Causing Injury or Death - Civil and Criminal Liability

Summary

HB589 would create new civil and criminal penalties for the design or creation of artificial intelligence software that is capable of causing personal injury or death. Under the bill, a person who intentionally, knowingly, or negligently designs or creates such software would be strictly liable for damages if the software is used to cause injury or death, and could also face a civil penalty tied to Maryland’s cap on noneconomic damages. The bill also adds a new criminal offense in the Criminal Law article. Intentional design or creation of AI software capable of causing personal injury or death would be a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison and/or a $100,000 fine. Knowing conduct would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to 10 years and/or a $50,000 fine, and negligent conduct would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to 5 years and/or a $25,000 fine. The bill is set to take effect October 1, 2025.

Impact

HB589 would amend both the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article and the Criminal Law Article of the Maryland Code by creating a new subtitle on personal injury or death caused by implementation of artificial intelligence software and by adding a new criminal prohibition on designing or creating AI software with the capability of causing personal injury or death. It would expose developers, designers, and creators of such software to strict civil liability, civil penalties, and significant criminal sanctions, thereby expanding Maryland law into a new area of AI-related product and conduct regulation.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcripts, recorded votes, or formal status actions, so there is no documented legislative debate or vote-based sentiment to assess. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears to reflect a precautionary and restrictive approach to artificial intelligence, aiming to deter dangerous AI development through both civil and criminal enforcement.

Contention

The main point of contention inherent in the bill is its broad reach: it applies to intentional, knowing, and even negligent design or creation of AI software capable of causing injury or death, which could raise concerns about overbreadth, vagueness, and the practical difficulty of defining software “with the capability” of causing harm. Another likely issue is the severity of the penalties, especially the felony exposure for intentional conduct and the strict-liability civil framework, which could be viewed as imposing heavy burdens on AI developers, researchers, and technology companies. No specific opposing or supporting stakeholders are identified in the available materials, but those most likely affected would include AI developers, software companies, and potentially researchers working on high-risk or dual-use systems.