ChatGPT Wedding Won’t Be Legal Under Dutch Rules

Watch ChatGPT Wedding Won’t Be Legal Under Dutch Rules - Rizzle on Dailymotion

Transcript

00:00Chat GPT Wedding Won't Be Legal Under Dutch Rules

00:03A peculiar case in the Netherlands has sparked debate about the role and dependence on technology and personal commitments.

00:11Dutch officials annulled a couple's marriage after their chat GPT-generated vows didn't meet legal requirements.

00:17The decision highlights the challenges of using artificial intelligence in personal and legal contexts.

00:23A Dutch court has declared a couple's marriage invalid, citing failure to meet the country's legal requirements.

00:30According to Reuters, the Zwolle Court of the Netherlands declared the couple's April 2025 marriage invalid

00:35because the chat GPT-generated vows didn't meet Dutch legal requirements.

00:40The AI-crafted speech lacked necessary declarations,

00:44specifically the commitment to fulfill marriage duties as stated in Article 167 of the Dutch Civil Code.

00:51As a result, the marriage will be removed from the city registry in Zwolle.

00:55The court understands that the date in the marriage deed is important to the man and woman,

00:59but cannot ignore what the law says, the judge's ruling statement said.

01:04For those intrigued, Article 167, Paragraph 1 of the Dutch Civil Code states that

01:09According to Gulf News, the Zwolle-based couple wanted a laid-back civil ceremony and therefore had asked a friend to officiate.

01:31The friend used chat GPT to craft heartfelt personal vows.

01:36However, the AI-generated speech missed the crucial part of explicitly committing to fulfill marriage duties,

01:42as required by Dutch law.

01:44The court's decision revealed some of the chat GPT-generated vows.

01:49They included promises to support each other, tease each other, and embrace each other, even when life gets tough.

01:55The officiant even called the duo a crazy couple, while aiming for an informal tone.

02:01The couple pleaded with the court to keep their original wedding date.

02:04While they cited emotional significance and their genuine intent to marry,

02:08the ruling authority stood its ground.

02:11This means that the marriage certificate was erroneously recorded in the civil registry, the judgment said.