scholarly journals THE HARM CAUSED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: ASPECTS OF RESPONSIBILITY AND LEGAL PERSONALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 76-80
Author(s):  
Yana Gayvoronskaya ◽  
Ekaterina Galchun
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Fiction ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Radical Reform ◽  
Advanced Technologies

A rule of law is effective when it adequately reflects objective needs and corresponds to the laws of the development of public relations. However, information technologies are developing faster than the corresponding legislative regulation. Programs equipped with artificial intelligence, once considered science fiction, are being increasingly used in various spheres of life every day. Advanced technologies are designed to significantly facilitate the life of a modern person, allowing him to transfer monotonous and technical tasks to units, i.e. carriers of artificial intelligence. However, the use of AI systems does not always turn out to be absolutely positive and safe – sometimes in practice, due to various factors, damage to property, health and even human life is caused during the operation of the unit. In this regard, legitimate questions arise about legal liability for such consequences, about the suitability of existing legislation to regulate such relations and about the need to improve and specialize legal regulation for new torts. This work is also aimed at participating in this discussion. For the purposes of the article, all negative manifestations of AI are reduced to three situations: causing harm due to flaws in the program or its incorrect operation; using technology by a person to commit an offense; causing harm by an artificial intelligence unit independently and on its own initiative. The paper examines all these cases, offers options for their legal resolution, critically evaluates existing approaches, projects and special legal acts already adopted. The conclusion is made that there is no need for a radical reform of the legal system for artificial intelligence, the theory of its legal personality is denied, it is argued that a person is responsible for all its mistakes – the manufacturer, user, owner, etc. In general, the strategy of the domestic legislator on the development of artificial intelligence is supported, but it is proposed to pay more attention to other ways to improve the security of AI systems (user liability insurance, unified accounting of units, etc.), rather than sanctions against them as "electronic persons".

scholarly journals Constitutional and Legal Status of Artificial Intelligence in Russia: Present and Future

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 78-85
Author(s):  
A. V. Nechkin
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Main Element ◽  
Current Form ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Socioeconomic Rights ◽  
Artificial Intelligence Technology

In the paper, the author uses general scientific and specific scientific methods of cognition to scrutinize the problems of constitutional and legal regulation of public relations in Russia, related to the widespread introduction of artificial intelligence technology. Based on the results of the research, the author concludes that modern Russian constitutional legislation, even in its current form, makes it possible to regulate the nascent social relations associated with the widespread introduction of artificial intelligence technology. In particular, it is noted that the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation allow for an expanded interpretation of the concept "personality", covering not only a person, but also highly developed artificial intelligence. According to the author, the constitutional and legal status of highly developed artificial intelligence should be based on the image and likeness of the constitutional and legal status of a person. The only exceptions should be the following. First is legal personality, which by its legal nature should be extremely close to the legal personality of bodies and organizations and should arise from the moment the relevant decision is made by the competent state authority. Rights, freedoms and obligations should imply a limited amount of personal rights and freedoms, the complete absence of political and socioeconomic rights. The last exception is the limited passive dispositive capacity of artificial intelligence. In addition, the main element in the structure of the constitutional and legal status of artificial intelligence in Russia should be universal restrictions on its rights and freedoms, which would serve as analogues of natural human physiological restrictions and would not allow artificial intelligence to acquire evolutionary advantages over humans. Thus, the structure of the constitutional and legal status of artificial intelligence as a person can and should in the future look like this: legal personality; rights, freedoms and duties; guarantees that ensure the implementation of rights and freedoms; universal restrictions on rights and freedoms.

scholarly journals ON THE ISSUE OF THE NEED FOR THE INSTITUTION OF LEGAL PERSONALITY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AT THE PRESENT DEVELOPMENT STAGE OF THE RULE-OF-LAW STATE

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 23-33
Author(s):  
Светлана Горохова
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Strong Artificial Intelligence

An urgent problem of transforming Russian legal system at the present stage of its development is to find an optimal balance in determining fundamental approaches to the legal regulation of public relations complicated by cyberphysical systems, artificial intelligence, various types of robots and robotics objects, as well as to consider the possibility of giving legal personality to weak and strong artificial intelligence in various branches of law and legislation. Purpose: analysis of the issues related to determining the legal status of artificial intellectual systems, taking into account modern requirements dictated by scientific and technological progress, the development of social relations, and the rule-of-law principles, aimed at ensuring respect for the individual rights and legitimate interests, society and the state Methods: on the basis of dialectical and metaphysical methods, general scientific (analysis, synthesis, comparative law, etc.), and specific scientific (legal-dogmatic, cybernetic, interpretation) methods of scientific knowledge are used. Results: at the present stage of technological development, we should talk about the existence of a weak narrow-purpose AI (Narrow AI) and a strong General-purpose AI (General AI). Super-strong intelligence (Super AI) does not yet exist, although its development is predicted in the future. Narrow AI, of course, can not reach natural intelligence, so, based on its internal properties, it can not be considered a subject in relations under any circumstances. In contrast to narrow AI (Narrow AI), General AI (GAI) has a developed intelligence comparable to that of a human in certain characteristics. The theoretical discussion of giving an artificial intelligence the status of a subject or a “quasi” subject of law makes sense only for technological solutions in the rank of General AI and Super AI. In the case of an AIS, it can only be a question of partial legal capacity. Partial legal capacity is a status that applies to subjects that have legal capacity only in accordance with specific legal norms, but are otherwise not obligated or entitled. Therefore, when choosing the concept of legislative assignment of partial legal capacity to the AIS, it is necessary to determine which specific rights or “right obligations” will be granted to General AI and Super AI.

Approaches to understanding the category "special legal regimes"

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
Oleksandr M. Bukhanevych ◽  
Anastasiia M. Mernyk ◽  
Oleh O. Petryshyn
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Martial Law ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Legal Regimes

The study investigates the main approaches to understanding such legal categories as “legal regimes” and “special legal regime”, and provides their classification. Special legal regimes serve as the legal basis for restricting human and civil rights and freedoms; therefore, the relevance of the study of the concept, types, and main features of special legal regimes is beyond doubt. The authors of the study consider the relationship between the categories of special legal regime of a state of emergency and martial law, and describe the main grounds for their imposition. The authors noted a need for a clear, consistent legal regulation of the model of behaviour aimed at overcoming and eliminating negative consequences of an emergency and military nature. Attention is focused on the fact that in Ukraine, the regulation of public relations arising in connection with emergencies and military situations has become particularly important after the emergence of a military conflict on the territory of Ukraine and the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The study provides the author’s vision of the categories “legal regimes” and “special legal regimes”. it is proposed to interpret the legal regimes as the regulatory procedure, which is expressed in a set of legal means that describe a special combination of interacting permits, prohibitions, and obligations, while implementing a special focus of regulation. The latter should be interpreted as a form of public administration that makes provision for the restriction of the legal personality of individuals and legal entities, introduced as a temporary measure provided by means of administrative and legal nature, and aimed at ensuring the security of the individual, society, and the state. The study provides the classification of special legal regimes and contains proposals to distinguish them according to the content and basis of occurrence as follows: state of emergency, martial law, state of siege, state of war, state of public danger, state of tension, state of defence, state of threat, state of readiness, state of vigilance

Systematization and improvement legal regulation of the use of artificial intelligence in law enforcement

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-112
Author(s):  
Vadim K. Barchukov
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Information Support ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Effective Work ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article systematizes legal acts at the international, Federal and departmental levels on the use of artificial intelligence in law enforcement. In particular, at the international level, the corresponding legal act, according to the author, should contain three components of legal regulation: 1) regulate the organization and construction of an artificial intelligence system between States; 2) determine the principles of functioning of artificial intelligence; 3) regulate the ethical issues of using artificial intelligence. The legal basis for the use of artificial intelligence systems in law enforcement at the Federal level, in addition to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, should be the Strategy for the development of the information society in the Russian Federation (Strategy) for 2017-2030, as well as some special Federal laws (for example, the Law of Moscow), which are designed to specify the mechanism for using the advantages of artificial intelligence in all spheres of public life, including law enforcement. The author notes that the mentioned strategy defines only the General provisions of the state policy on the development of information technologies and artificial intelligence technologies. At the same time, the implementation of national interests outlined in the Strategy is impossible without the effective work of law enforcement agencies, whose functioning, in turn, is impossible without a well-built system of interaction between information support and artificial intelligence. The final part of the paper presents some proposals for improving the legal regulation of the use of artificial intelligence in law enforcement, in particular, justifies the need to adopt a national Doctrine for the use of a Unified system of information support and artificial intelligence in the activities of law enforcement agencies.

scholarly journals Criminological Risks of Using Artificial Intelligence

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 767-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ildar Begishev ◽  
Zarina Khisamova
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Intelligent System ◽  
State Level ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Theoretical Concept ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Global Business ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Digital World ◽  
The Status

The topics of artificial intelligence (AI) and the development of intelligent technologies are highly relevant and important in the modern digital world. Over its fifty years of history, AI has developed from a theoretical concept to an intelligent system capable of making independent decisions. Key advantages of using AI include, primarily, an opportunity for mankind to get rid of routine work and to engage in creative activities that machines are not capable of. According to international consulting agencies, global business investments in digital transformation will reach 58 trillion USD by 2021, while global GDP will grow by 14 %, or 15.7 trillion USD, in connection with the active use of AI. However, its rapid evolvement poses new threats connected with AI’s ability to self-develop that the state and the society have to counteract; specifically, they have to introduce normative regulation of AI activities and to address threats arising from its functioning. The authors present a thorough analysis of the opinions of leading researchers in the field of social aspects of AI’s functioning. They also state that the regulation of the status of AI as a legal personality, not to mention its ability to commit legally meaningful actions, remains an open question today. At present, the process of creating a criminological basis for applying AI, connected with the development of new intelligent technologies, is underway, it requires actions and decisions aimed at preventing possible negative effects of its use and reacting to them on a state level. The authors’ analysis of the history of AI’s emergence and development has allowed them to outline its key features that pose criminological risks, to determine criminological risks of using AI and to present their own classification of such risks. In particular, they single out direct and indirect criminological risks of using AI. A detailed analysis has allowed the authors to identify an objective need for establishing special state agencies that will develop state policy in the sphere of normative legal regulation, control and supervision over the use of AI.

scholarly journals Legal Personality of an Interpreter in Criminal Proceedings in the Age of Digitalization

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 77-87
Author(s):  
E. K. Antonovich
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Electronic Format ◽  
Positive Experience ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Russian Federation

The importance of digitalization in all industries is increasing, especially since the possibilities of information technologies are obvious. Criminal proceedings are no exception. In criminal proceedings, information technologies are generally used in the production of an investigative action or with the transition of the entire criminal proceedings to an electronic format. Digitalization in criminal proceedings can be caused by the search for the optimal way to increase the efficiency of criminal proceedings and create reliable guarantees for the protection of the rights and freedoms of persons involved in the criminal proceedings, the use of information technologies on a single digital platform in the paradigm of decisions and evidence. Therefore, digitalization can play a certain role in making decisions about the participation of a person in criminal proceedings.The concept of "artificial intelligence (AI)" appeared in the middle of the last century, but it is only now that AI itself and its capabilities became of interest to society. Modern electronic dictionaries and built-in translators have become popular. It seems important to take into account the very nature of digital technologies.The paper is devoted to clarifying the question of whether multi-vector and multi-valued information technologies can replace any participants in criminal proceedings or become one of the conditions for creating a basis for such a participant as a translator to enter the sphere of criminal proceedings. We will analyze not only the legislation and law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation, but also the positive experience of legislation and law enforcement practice of some foreign countries.

scholarly journals Principles оf Regulatory Activity of Bodies State Authority

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 52-60
Author(s):  
Zoya Pogorelova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Rule Making

The article, based on clarifying the content of related concepts of law-making, considers the principles of the rule-making activity as the power activity of public authorities. Such principles include the principles of humanism, democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and scientific validity of rule-making decisions, which necessitates the professionalism of rule-making activities, planning, systematics, complexity, timely revision and updating of legislation, and transparency. The content of these principles is revealed, their ranking is carried out, their importance for legal science and practice is emphasized, and the positions of scientists concerning their optimal list and characteristics are analyzed. In particular, attention is drawn to the fact that the principle of humanism is reflected in the fundamental values that underlie the constitutional order, the basis of the current law and human rights enshrined in the Constitution and laws of Ukraine: human dignity, the right to self-realization, justice and freedom, non-discrimination and equality before thelaw, tolerance, responsibility and respect for others. The principle of democracy, as a fundamental principle of rule-making, legitimizes the subjects of rule-making and creates a basis for their legal activities. The rule of law is also a fundamental principle of rule-making (including its components such as the principle of direct effect of the Constitution of Ukraine, the rule of the Constitution as the Basic Law, the principle of legality, legal certainty, the equality before the law and non-discrimination, and proportionality). It is emphasized that the principle of scientific validity of rule-making decisions necessitates professionalism of rule-making activities, and ensuring a high professional level of rule-makers makes it possible to carry out rule-making activities at a high scientific level, on a planned, systematic, comprehensive basis, the legal regulation of public relations, and the implementation of state functions. Aspects of the principle of publicity of normative activity of the Parliament, the Government, and the President of Ukraine are also analyzed.

scholarly journals Artificial intelligence: economy, intellectual property, threats

2021 ◽  
pp. 56-74
Author(s):  
Hennadii Androshchuk
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
World Market ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Personality

Keywords: artificial intelligence, economic impact, intellectual property, regulation,cybersecurity, risks, threats, national security Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, the spread of which is based on thewidespread use of digital information and the rapid growth of computing power, areleaving the realm of purely theoretical research and becoming one of the segmentsof the world market that can have truly revolutionary consequences. The paper provideseconomic and legal analysis of the state and trends of AI, identifies its impacton the economy, the importance of the role of intellectual property (IP), assesses therisks, threats and dangers of criminal use of AI, developed mechanisms to counterthem. The development of AI technologies as an integral part of «Industry 4.0» isconsidered, the main provisions of the «White Paper on Artificial Intelligence» ofthe EU are studied.Over the next decade, the EU plans to spend $20 billion a year on AI development.At the same time, the protection of IP rights in the context of AI development and relatedtechnologies has been unconsidered by the Commission, despite the key importanceof these rights. In legal regulation, AI is seen as a new challenge for the economyand the legal system, a new phenomenon that has a multiplier effect, a legal phenomenonin the structure of legal relations, a new object for legal regulation. The introduction of AI in the field of IP creates new legal and economic problems.The creation of AI works is an integral area of activity in the modern digital economy.These circumstances bring to the fore the problem of recognition of authorship in thecreation of AI works, the possibility of authors to dispose of their rights and their useof mechanisms for legal protection of IP. The analysis of the cases considered bycourts connected with a problem of legal personality of AI is carried out, legislative activityon this question is studied. Possibilities and dangers of criminal use of AI areshown. They are ranked in order of their level of danger — depending on the harmthey may cause, the potential benefit or the benefit of crime. Prospects for the developmentof AI in Ukraine are shown, the Concept of development of artificial intelligencein Ukraine is analysed. It is concluded that AI should become one of the key driversof digital transformation and overall growth of Ukraine's economy.

Using Platforms and Platform Law to Overcome Risks Caused by Digitalization Processes

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 969-974
Author(s):  
A. V. Altoukhov ◽  
S. Yu. Kashkin ◽  
M. V. Kuz’mina
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Technological Unit ◽  
Legal Risks ◽  
Analytical Work ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Legitimate Interests

Fundamental changes within a country and at the global level can have contradictory consequences for society. The more areas are affected by changes and the deeper these changes are, the more significant the necessary innovations can be. Considering the scale of digitalization and application of artificial intelligence technologies based on it, it can be concluded that we are dealing with an unprecedented phenomenon that needs to be thoroughly assessed by different experts.Aim. The presented study aims to assess risks associated with the implementation of platform solutions without appropriate legislative initiatives, which, in turn, should facilitate the creation of the platform law institution. Today, legal science assesses risks associated with the legislative regulation of processes and creates conditions for safe and productive interaction with new mechanisms.Tasks. The authors examine current legislation to create conditions for protecting the rights and legitimate interests of legal entities in their interaction with cutting-edge digital solutions and for analyzing the possibility of full-scale application of digital platforms on this basis; estimate the legal risks of applying digital innovations under current conditions.Results. Analytical work has shown that platform solutions are a new technological unit that cannot be fully regulated by existing legal norms due to its technological features. The lack of personalized legal regulation of platforms not only infringes the rights of citizens providing various public and other services using digital technologies, but also creates conditions for the aggravation of the crime situation and the development of new types of crime.Conclusions. The main risks of mass digitalization are considered. The technological features of innovations make it necessary to develop a branch of law that would regulate public relations during interaction with platform solutions and other information technologies. The authors propose a new complex mechanism of legal regulation — platform law, which will make using platforms completely safe and efficient in all sectors of society.

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY OF LEGAL NORMS AND ITS ASSESSMENT THROUGH THE PRISM OF THE RULE OF LAW (ON THE EXAMPLE OF TAX LEGISLATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
Volodymyr USTYMENKO ◽  
◽  
Ruslan DZHABRAILOV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Tax Policy ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Project Work ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Economic Criterion ◽  
The Rule Of Law

It is noted that an important quality of legal regulation should be the effectiveness of the method and means chosen by the state to promote the achievement of the planned socio-economic result. Despite the fact that some principles of normative project work have been covered at the legislative level (in particular, on the example of legislation in the field of regulatory policy), the practice of adopting normative legal acts the effectiveness of which remains questionable continues. One of the reasons for this state of legal regulation of social relations is the improper consideration, and sometimes conscious disregard for theoretical and applied constructions that have been substantiated within the framework of legal and economic science. As a result, this leads to the establishment of an unjust order in a certain area of public relations, which threatens the further sustainable development of the state. In view of this, attention is focused on the defects of the implementation of legal principles, especially the principle of the rule of law, in the field of legal regulation of economic relations, which leads to the imaginary effectiveness of the relevant legal acts. It is proved that the effectiveness of legal regulation of public relations will be evidenced not only by the rate of achievement of the expected result at the expense of the minimum necessary resources of economic entities, citizens and the state (i.e. the economic criterion), but also the degree of compliance with the rule of law, which will allow to talk about promoting the adoption by a legal act of the ideology of justice. Based on the analysis of some examples of legislative practice in the field of taxation, it is established that the adoption of regulations contrary to the rule of law has led to the direction of tax policy to achieve socio-economic results that contradict the principles of tax policy as a type of economic policyand principles of social policy of the state in terms of income redistribution set out in strategic documents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document