The impact of AI on criminal law, and its two fold procedures

Pagallo, Ugo; Quattrocolo, Serena

doi:10.4337/9781786439055.00026

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the extent of the legal personhood of corporations dramatically varies among legal systems. Contrary to the US tradition, for example, most EU companies do not enjoy their own privacy rights, or their own political rights, such as freedom of speech [20]; corporations cannot be held criminally responsible [21], and so forth. This latter scenario is at odds with that which advocates of the legal personhood of AI robots usually claim: at least in Europe, the corporate solution for the legal personhood of AI robots would be a Pyrrhic victory.…”

Section: Levels Of Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots

Pagallo

2018

Information

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper examines today’s debate on the legal status of AI robots, and how often scholars and policy makers confuse the legal agenthood of these artificial agents with the status of legal personhood. By taking into account current trends in the field, the paper suggests a twofold stance. First, policy makers shall seriously mull over the possibility of establishing novel forms of accountability and liability for the activities of AI robots in contracts and business law, e.g., new forms of legal agenthood in cases of complex distributed responsibility. Second, any hypothesis of granting AI robots full legal personhood has to be discarded in the foreseeable future. However, how should we deal with Sophia, which became the first AI application to receive citizenship of any country, namely, Saudi Arabia, in October 2017? Admittedly, granting someone, or something, legal personhood is—as always has been—a highly sensitive political issue that does not simply hinge on rational choices and empirical evidence. Discretion, arbitrariness, and even bizarre decisions play a role in this context. However, the normative reasons why legal systems grant human and artificial entities, such as corporations, their status, help us taking sides in today’s quest for the legal personhood of AI robots. Is citizen Sophia really conscious, or capable of suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous scholars?

show abstract

Section: Levels Of Abstractionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots

Pagallo

2018

Information

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If AI products or robots are shown to have sufficient consciousness or awareness, then they may be the direct perpetrators of criminal offenses or responsible for negligent crimes. If we admit that AI products have their own mind, human-like free will, autonomy, or moral sense, then our criminal law and even the entire legal system will have to be revised [60].…”

Section: D) Impact On the Legal Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Overview of Artificial Intelligence Ethics

Huang

Zhang

Mao

et al. 2023

IEEE Trans. Artif. Intell.

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial intelligence (AI) has profoundly changed and will continue to change our lives. AI is being applied in more and more fields and scenarios such as autonomous driving, medical care, media, finance, industrial robots, and internet services. The widespread application of AI and its deep integration with the economy and society have improved efficiency and produced benefits. At the same time, it will inevitably impact the existing social order and raise ethical concerns. Ethical issues, such as privacy leakage, discrimination, unemployment, and security risks, brought about by AI systems have caused great trouble to people. Therefore, AI ethics, which is a field related to the study of ethical issues in AI, has become not only an important research topic in academia, but also an important topic of common concern for individuals, organizations, countries, and society. This paper will give a comprehensive overview of this field by summarizing and analyzing the ethical risks and issues raised by AI, ethical guidelines and principles issued by different organizations, approaches for addressing ethical issues in AI, methods for evaluating the ethics of AI. Additionally, challenges in implementing ethics in AI and some future perspectives are pointed out. We hope our work will provide a systematic and comprehensive overview of AI ethics for researchers and practitioners in this field, especially the beginners of this research discipline.Impact Statement-AI ethics is an important emerging topic among academia, industry, government, society, and individuals. In the past decades, many efforts have been made to study the ethical issues in AI. This article offers a comprehensive overview of the AI ethics field, including the summary and analysis of AI ethical issues, ethical guidelines and principles, approaches to address AI ethical issues, and methods to evaluate the ethics of AI. Additionally, some challenges and future perspectives are discussed. This article will help researchers to obtain sufficient background and a bird's eye view of AI ethics, and thus facilitate their further investigation and research.

show abstract

“…'no crime, nor punishment without a criminal law' (nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege). As a result, scholars have to determine whether AI robots may produce a novel generation of loopholes in the criminal law field, forcing lawmakers to intervene at both national and international levels, much as they did in the early 1990s with a new generation of computer crimes [8,11].…”

Section: The Tablementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the extent of the legal personhood of corporations varies among legal systems. Contrary to the US tradition, for example, most EU companies do not enjoy their own privacy rights, or their own political rights, such as freedom of speech [8]; corporations cannot be held criminally responsible in the civil, as opposed to the common, law tradition [11], etc. All in all, legal systems can hold the big companies of Silicon Valley accountable for what their AI systems do, and yet some of these AI systems could still be conceived of as, say, 'data processors' pursuant to Article 28 of the EU regulation on data protection.…”

Section: (C) Confusion Nomentioning

confidence: 99%

Apples, oranges, robots: four misunderstandings in today's debate on the legal status of AI systems

Pagallo¹

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars have increasingly discussed the legal status(es) of robots and artificial intelligence (AI) systems over the past three decades; however, the 2017 resolution of the EU parliament on the ‘electronic personhood’ of AI robots has reignited and even made current debate ideological. Against this background, the aim of the paper is twofold. First, the intent is to show how often today's discussion on the legal status(es) of AI systems leads to different kinds of misunderstanding that regard both the legal personhood of AI robots and their status as accountable agents establishing rights and obligations in contracts and business law. Second, the paper claims that whether or not the legal status of AI systems as accountable agents in civil––as opposed to criminal––law may make sense is an empirical issue, which should not be ‘politicized’. Rather, a pragmatic approach seems preferable, as shown by methods of competitive federalism and legal experimentation. In the light of the classical distinction between primary rules and secondary rules of the law, examples of competitive federalism and legal experimentation aim to show how the secondary rules of the law can help us understanding what kind of primary rules we may wish for our AI robots. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Governing artificial intelligence: ethical, legal, and technical opportunities and challenges’.

show abstract

The impact of AI on criminal law, and its two fold procedures

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots

Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots

An Overview of Artificial Intelligence Ethics

Apples, oranges, robots: four misunderstandings in today's debate on the legal status of AI systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About