Skip to main content

robots - What happens to someone who destroys a Star Wars Droid?


Some Star Wars Droids are definitively sentient beings, but it appears that they are not treated as such.


The Legal Status section of the Droid article of Wookieepedia (which have no references) said they are typically treated as property, but does the status change along with the various governments? Is there any known canon occurrence in the expanded universe where consequences of the destruction of a droid have been explored?



Answer



The book 'The Courtship of Princess Leia' mentions (in passing) an activist group for droid rights (when Threepio asks to address the Senate, who for some reason have a say in who Leia can marry).


Under the Empire, droids had no rights.


I haven't read anything after the Vong invasion, so I can't speak to that.


In general, consensus for thousands of years has had droids as property, with rare ones as independent operators (though their legal status is questionable).


There is a definite indication that the New Republic was more lax in this - Threepio WAS permitted to address the Senate, and state a contrary opinion, without any significant repercussions, but droids ARE generally property.



And it makes sense - droids are manufactured for tasks, engineered and designed with a purpose in mind, do not self-reproduce, are marketed and purchased, easily controllable by commercially available items (restraining bolts), and - with regular maintenance and routine wipes - completely lacking in distinct individual personality.


Droids like R2 and C3-P0 are unusual (owing to their history, if nothing else). Most droids do not even approach their level of personality or individuality.


As to whether this is RIGHT (ethically), I can't speak. Certainly we've seen that droids have the potential to be more than property, but there has never been a general emancipation of them.


It's even likely that, were there to be a general granting of rights to droids, they would cease being created (or new droids would lack the capabilities that are at the core of what gave droids rights) - it wouldn't make fiscal sense for a company to produce end products which they would be unable to sell.


Edit: To more correctly answer your secondary questions:


It's never explicitly stated what happens (legally speaking) to someone who destroys a droid. They have no intrinsic rights, so it would be treated (under every government I'm familiar with) as destruction of property. If you legally owned the droid, nothing would happen except that you wouldn't have a droid (unless the droid had some special circumstance, such as having evidence in another legal matter, in which case it's destruction could be obstruction of justice or similar). If it was another's droid, it could legally be considered destruction of their property, and punished as such.


If the droid was state property (battle droid, court recorder, maintenance droid, etc) it would be destruction of government property.


If the droid had no owner, like with IG-88 (the independent assassin droid), there would likely be no legal repercussions (well, maybe 'littering' if you left it lying there, or 'disturbing the peace' if you caused a big ruckus in destroying it).


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more

warhammer40k - What evidence supposedly supports Tau as related to the Necrontyr?

I've heard of rumours saying that the Tau from Warhammer 40K are in fact the Necrontyr. Is there anything that supports this statement, in WH40K canon? I just found this, on 1d4 chan 1 : Helping Necrons? Or are they Necrontyr descendants? An often overlooked issue is that Tau have no warp signatures, just like Necrons, hate Warpspawns and Warp in general, just like Necrons, have the exact same skull shape,stature and short lives, and the overwhelming need for Technology and beam weapons, JUST LIKE NECRONS. GW may have planned a race that simply prepares a pacified, multiracial galaxy for Necrons to feast upon, supported by Ethereals that have a C'tan phase blade. Then there is a reference of "dark seed in east" by the Deceiver, so the tricky C'tan might give Tzeentch the finger in the JUST AS PLANNED competition. Or maybe GW just has so little creativity that they simply made a new civ conforming to an Old One's standards without knowing it. Is this the connec...
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more