Boston Dynamics previously signed an open letter pledging not to weaponize its robot. | Source: Boston Dynamics
Robotics experts testified at the Massachusetts State House last week in support of legislation promoting the safe, ethical use of robotics statewide. The panel included Tom Ryden, executive director of MassRobotics, Kelly Peterson, assistant general counsel of compliance at Boston Dynamics, and Grant Baker, senior manager of government affairs at the Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI).
They testified in favor of S.1208, a bill that is currently making its way through the Massachusetts legislature. The “Act to ensure the responsible use of advanced robotic technologies” outlines rules and regulations to ensure people use robots responsibly.
“This Act provides guidelines to show and clearly indicate what is allowed and what is not allowed for robotics, and we believe it’s an important thing,” Ryden said during the hearing. “It would allow Massachusetts to be first and lead the nation in this type of legislation, and so we are in favor of this and strongly support it.”
This isn’t the first time organizations have advocated for the ethical use of robots. In 2022, for example, Boston Dynamics signed an open letter pledging not to weaponize robots, along with other robotics developers Agility Robotics, ANYBotics, Clearpath Robotics, Open Robotics, and Unitree. The group won an RBR50 Robotics Innovation Award from The Robot Report for the pledge.
In 2024, MassRobotics participated in a Congressional Robotics Caucus Briefing on Building Toward a National Robotics Strategy. The briefing also included the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI).
If it’s passed, S.1208 would make it unlawful to modify, sell, or operate a robotic device equipped with or mounted with a weapon. Additionally, it would make it unlawful to use a robot to threaten to commit a crime, physically restrain, or harass another person.
“The last thing we want, or that the industry needs, is for any of these devices in the hands of consumers to be weaponized,” Peterson said. “Yet, we have seen examples of that on YouTube, unfortunately, including people mounting machine guns to robot dogs and selling flamethrower-equipped robots. This Act addresses this misuse.”
The legislation outlines some exceptions to these rules. It doesn’t apply to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and its various departments and agencies, the Massachusetts National Guard, and defense industrial companies within the scope of contracts with the DOD. It also includes special permissions for those who obtain a waiver from the attorney general for testing or educational purposes.
The Act also included exceptions for law enforcement officers to use robotics to diffuse or dispose of explosives, destroy property when there is an imminent threat of death, and for testing and training purposes.
Additionally, the Act says that law enforcement must obtain a warrant, or other legally required judicial authorization, before using robotic devices on private property. This applies to any situation where an officer would require a warrant for entry.
Basically, it says if an officer needs a warrant to enter a building, then so would a robot. This also applies to conducting surveillance or location tracking in situations that would otherwise require a warrant.
“It’s of the most vital importance that measures such as this be taken to promote safe operations of these systems,” Baker said. “This is crucial not just in promoting public safety, but in building public trust and confidence in advanced robotics.”
Tell Us What You Think!