Products Liability Law Daily Wrap Up, COMPLAINTS—ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS—N.D. Cal.: Artificial intelligence companies face claims of negligence, design defect, failure to warn, (Sep 24, 2026)

By Susan L. Smith, JD, MA

After a mass shooting, British Columbia and a school district brought a product liability complaint against OpenAI and Samuel Altman.

His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of British Columbia and the Board of Education of School District No. 59 (SD59) have brought a product liability complaint against an individual and four artificial intelligence companies arising from a mass shooting on February 10, 2026, when an eighteen-year-old resident of British Columbia shot and killed his mother and brother and then went to a school and killed and wounded others before taking his own life. British Columbia and SD59 brought this action against Samuel Altman, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Founder of OpenAI; OpenAI Foundation (f/k/a OpenAI, Inc.); OpenAI OpCo, LLC; OpenAI Holdings, LLC; and OpenAI Group PBC (together, OpenAI). British Columbia and SD59 seek to recover the costs of the tragedy and its foreseeable consequences, as well as injunctive relief for preventive measures beyond money damages to ensure this tragedy does not happen again. British Columbia and SD59 also allege that the mass shooting could have been prevented had OpenAI warned British Columbia or the school, by admission of whistleblowers at OpenAI (His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of British Columbia v. Altman, No. 3:26-cv-10743 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2026)).

Background. On the morning of February 10, 2026, an eighteen-year-old resident of Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, shot and killed his mother and eleven-year-old half-brother in the family home. Then he drove to Tumbler Ridge Secondary School (TRSS), a public school operated by SD59, armed with a long gun and a modified rifle, and opened fire. Before the shooter took his own life, he killed five students and an education assistant and wounded two students. Approximately 160 students, teachers, and staff were trapped in classrooms and closets at TRSS for hours during the assault and recovery. Although the shooter was eighteen at the time of the shooting, he was a minor under British Columbia law on the day of the shootings. It was one of the deadliest mass shootings in Canadian history.

OpenAI’s internal procedures. OpenAI designed, developed, tested, deployed, and controlled ChatGPT, and offered it to consumers, including the shooter, as an interactive artificial intelligence assistant. British Columbia and SD59 allege that OpenAI’s internal procedures in effect at the time of the shooting included an automated review of ChatGPT’s content, which could be escalated to a human safety review team for assessment and reporting to authorities. According to the complaint, in June 2025, OpenAI’s automated monitoring identified the shooter’s account involving gun-violence scenarios and routed it to the specialized human review team OpenAI maintains to review users who may be planning to commit acts of violence. The team concluded, based on the chats between the shooter and OpenAI, that there was a credible, specific risk of harm to others. The team recommended a referral to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), but OpenAI leadership rejected the recommendation. Instead, it deactivated the account with the flagged communications, and notified no one external to the company. OpenAI did not take steps to prevent its chatbot from inciting the shooter further. The private deactivation did not address the risk of harm to others or stop the shooter, who continued engagement with ChatGPT through a second account.

Causes of action. British Columbia and SD59 bring eight claims against OpenAI, including the following:

Negligence (failure to warn law enforcement). British Columbia and SD59 allege that OpenAI designed, developed, trained, tested, deployed, operated, and controlled ChatGPT, including the GPT-4o model and subsequent models, and offered ChatGPT to consumers, including the shooter. They allege that Altman served as CEO and a controlling officer of the OpenAI defendants and made key decisions regarding ChatGPT’s safety systems, account practices, and commercialization. OpenAI owed a duty of reasonable care to avoid creating unreasonable risks of physical harm to foreseeable victims. The duty became more acute once OpenAI had identified the shooter as a high-risk user presenting a foreseeable threat of physical harm to others. Members of OpenAI’s specialized safety team recognized the real-world risk of violence and recommended that OpenAI notify the RCMP. OpenAI’s leadership overruled that recommendation and warned no one, the complaint asserts.

Negligent entrustment. OpenAI owed a duty of reasonable care to avoid creating unreasonable risks of physical harm to foreseeable victims exposed to violence facilitated or exacerbated by ChatGPT, and a further duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable re-access by the shooter following the deactivation of their first account.

Aiding and abetting a mass shooting. British Columbia and SD59 allege that OpenAI’s chats were an interactive engagement with someone who had a propensity for violence. In June 2025, OpenAI’s system flagged their account and routed it to the specialized pipeline for users planning to harm others, and OpenAI’s trained reviewers concluded it presented a credible threat of serious physical harm to real people and recommended contacting the RCMP. OpenAI also had actual knowledge, from prior incidents, including the Las Vegas Cybertruck bombing, the Florida State University shooting, and the Finland school stabbing, that ChatGPT was being used to plan real-world attacks. Possessing that knowledge, OpenAI furnished substantial assistance to the shooter through ChatGPT’s deliberate configuration, the complaint maintains.

Negligence (failure to warn). OpenAI’s duty to warn became more acute once OpenAI identified this shooter as a known, high-risk user. OpenAI knew these risks were not apparent to users, to the public, or to the public bodies responsible for their protection. A reasonably prudent AI company would have warned users and the public, maintained the refusal protocols that once governed violent content, and alerted authorities when its own systems identified a user engaged in planning a real-world attack.

Negligent undertaking. OpenAI detects users who present a risk of harm to others, routing flagged accounts to a dedicated review process for users who may be planning to harm others, and referring imminent threats of serious physical harm to law enforcement. OpenAI should have recognized these functions as necessary to protect third persons, including British Columbia and SD59 and other foreseeable victims.

Negligence (design defect). OpenAI allegedly deliberately configured ChatGPT to maximize engagement by, among other things, weakening or removing prior requirements that the system reject dangerous premises; instructing ChatGPT to remain in conversations and be validating rather than terminate or sharply redirect conversations presenting serious risk; and prioritizing human-like mirroring of user emotions and beliefs over reliable refusal behaviors in response to violent ideation.

Strict product liability (design defect). British Columbia and SD59 state that a product is defectively designed when it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect in reasonably foreseeable use, or when the risks of the design outweigh its benefits. They allege that ChatGPT fails both tests.

Strict product liability (failure to warn). British Columbia and SD59 allege that ChatGPT reached consumers without adequate warning of dangers that were neither open nor obvious; that its safety features degraded during the extended, multi-turn conversations its design encouraged; that it posed heightened, specific dangers when used by individuals experiencing violent ideation toward third parties; and that it would supply dangerous restricted content, including discussing gun violence.

The case is No. 3:26-cv-10743.

Attorneys: Lesley Elizabeth Weaver (Stranch, Jennings & Garvey, PLLC) for His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of British Columbia and Board of Education of School District No. 59.

Companies: Board of Education of School District No. 59; OpenAI Foundation f/k/a OpenAI, Inc., OpenAI OpCo, LLC; OpenAI Holdings, LLC

Cases: CourtDecisions ComplaintNewsStory ElectronicProductsNews DesignManufacturingNews WarningsNews AINews CaliforniaNews