Sellers are biased in title laws for property in America in many ways. This has been going on for quite some time and it would be very hard to change that way. Buyers do not like this fact but it is one they have to deal with and they will have to pay more for.
Of course sellers are bias when it comes to title laws for property in America. I think that the seller will obviously always do what is necessary to get the price for his or her property when they are trying to sell it. But it also depends on if the market is good.
Disclosure of information is up to the seller to disclose reasonably. Sellers often have the upper advantage in property knowledge that is not always fully disclosed to the buyer. Sellers make buyers responsible for closing costs that include title insurance. The title laws are intended to helper sellers maximize their own profit.
The buyer is liable for any breaches of the seller's obligations via the restrictive covenants. Restrictive covenants are found on the Charges Register in the official copies. They lay out any obligations that previous owners have placed on how the property may be used. As long as the restrictive covenant complies with certain restrictions such as not being too restrictive and the person who writes the restriction has some proximity to the land still [[Tulk v Moxhay]]. If the seller was in breach of one of the conditions on that charges register then the buyer would take on the liability and would have to pay to rectify the breach.
I do not believe sellers are biased, in title laws for property, in America. The system doesn't really favor the buyer or the seller, even though I feel it should favor the seller seeing that they are the ones that secure the property up to the point it is officially sold.