---
id: "prereq-fiduciary-duty"
type: "prereq"
source_timestamps: ["§ 1. Treat AI Agents as Fiduciaries"]
tags: ["legal-concepts"]
related: ["concept-ai-fiduciary-duty", "action-establish-ai-fiduciary-status"]
reason: "Required to understand the legal mechanism proposed to hold AI developers accountable."
sources: ["governance"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-governance"
originDay: 7
articleStem: "hbr-cl-88-can-ai-agents-be-trusted"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2025/05/can-ai-agents-be-trusted"
sourceTitle: "Can AI Agents Be Trusted?"
---
# Fiduciary Duty

The proposed legal solution relies heavily on the existing legal framework of fiduciary duty, which dictates the highest standard of care in law or equity. A fiduciary is expected to be extremely loyal to the person to whom they owe the duty, avoiding conflicts of interest and acting solely for the principal's benefit. This is the standard the authors want extended to software via [[concept-ai-fiduciary-duty]] and [[action-establish-ai-fiduciary-status]].

**Why you need it:** required to understand the legal mechanism proposed to hold AI developers accountable.
**Enrichment note:** applying fiduciary duty to AI is an emerging proposal; a common objection is that such duties attach to persons and institutions, so the real accountable party is the developer or deployer, not the software itself.


## Related across articles
- [[prereq-board-fiduciary-duties]]