Which principle governs third-party relationships in AI according to existing legal frameworks?

The principle that governs third-party relationships in AI according to existing legal frameworks revolves around traditional contract and liability practices. This approach emphasizes the necessity for clear contractual agreements that outline the responsibilities and obligations of parties involved in AI development and deployment. Such contracts ensure that there is a legal basis for accountability, governance, and compliance with regulations, safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders.

These traditional practices take into account established laws regarding liability, which provide a framework for addressing damages or issues that arise from the use of AI technologies. In scenarios where third parties may be impacted by AI systems or where data is shared, clearly defined contractual obligations help mitigate risks and clearly delineate who is responsible for various aspects of the AI's operation and any potential consequences.

In comparison, concepts like exclusivity in transactions, circular accountability, and real-time data sharing do not encapsulate the broader legal framework influencing third-party relationships. Exclusivity may restrict interactions without addressing liability; circular accountability lacks clarity in assignment of responsibility, and real-time data sharing, while technically relevant, does not inherently address the legal principles guiding relationships between parties in AI contexts. Therefore, traditional contract and liability practices remain central to navigating the complexities of third-party engagements in the realm of artificial intelligence.