[mindslight]

Your answers diverge, depending on who is operating the "robot". If it's being presented as a service by an investment firm, then you obviously have a standard dispute with the investment firm, the same as if one of the human brokers went nuts. If was sold as a software system to be self-administered, then you have an issue with a vendor. The latter may hinge solely on misrepresentation, because software is generally sold with little warranty for precisely these reasons.

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?