So much money slushing around can make things a little grayer because in either case the investor didn't actually perform any work themselves. But I'm confident they can use some of that money to discern who ultimately owned what, who employed who, and what type of relationship was created.
I feel like newswriters just love to generate hot air with this "sue a robot" trope. Who to sue for that?
Although obviously such warnings can't reach some people... My favourite example of this was the collapse of OptionSellers.com following the huge move in Natural Gas futures. I mean, they were selling options - it's right there in the name...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-19/hedge-fun...
Saying the algorithm makes 95% winning trades may not mean much if those remaining 5% of trades cause you to lose most of your value.
For example, if not being able to explain a model leaves an organization open to litigation, they may instead rely on statistical based learning methods even if they performed less well.
Is cheesing an algorithm illegal?