Challenges for Regulating Tort Liability for Adaptive Robots
An Analytical Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/zbcwrt24Keywords:
Adaptive Robots, Tort Liability, Legal ResponsibilityAbstract
This research paper unequivocally supports arguments seeking to establish a connection between the actions of an adaptive robot and those of a human being. It does not assert personal responsibility on the part of the robot; rather, it highlights the challenges associated with traditional theories in assigning responsibility to humans. Furthermore, the paper examines how modern theories aimed at overcoming the limitations of traditional approaches have not only failed to introduce new solutions but have also inherited their drawbacks.
In addressing these issues, the paper offers justifications for rejecting robots' personal responsibility, whether legal or illegal, by intertwining them with the moral and psychological aspects of responsibility within the legal framework. Subsequently, the paper proposes a robust legal foundation that sidesteps the pitfalls of existing theories, providing a more comprehensive perspective on regulating tort liability for adaptive robots.
Downloads
References
I. A.J.Kurki, A Theory of Legal Personhood, Oxford University press, edition 1, 2019.
II. Abdul Sattar, Musab Thayer and Mohammed, Bashar Qais, tort liability related to artificial intelligence, Journal of legal and Political Sciences, University of Diyala, Iraq, Vol. 10, 2021.
III. Al Muhairi, nila Ali, civil liability for robot damages (analytical study), master's thesis, United Arab Emirates University, college of law, United Arab Emirates, 2020.
IV. Al-araari, Abdelkader, sources of obligations: Book II: civil responsibility, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Aman printing library, Rabat, Morocco, 2011.
V. Alexandra Ben samoun et Grégoire Loiseau:” La gestion des risques de l’intelligence artificielle de l’éthique à la responsabilité, SJEG n°46, 13 novembre 2017, doctr. 1203.
VI. Alexandra Mendoza-Caminade, Caminade: Le droit confronté à l'intelligence artificielle des robots: vers l'émergence de nouveaux concepts juridiques?, D, 2016.
VII. Al-Khatib, Mohammad Irfan, civic responsibility and artificial intelligence... The possibility of accountability! An in-depth analytical study of the rules of civil liability in French civil law, Kuwait International Law College Journal, Kuwait, 2020.
VIII. Al-Khatib, Mohammad Irfan, the human machine Legal Center, the human machine Legal Center (Robots): personality and responsibility. Comparative rooting study: a reading in the European rules of civil law of the machine for 2017, Kuwait College of Law International Journal, Kuwait, 2018.
IX. Alkoussi, hummam, the problematic of the person responsible for the operation of the robot "the impact of the theory of the human deputy on the feasibility of law in the future": a forward-looking analytical study on the rules of European civil law on robots, Journal of generation in-depth legal research, generation Scientific Research Center, Algeria.
X. Al-mostrihi, Alaa Wasfi, the legal nature of the operator's civil liability for nuclear accident damage: a comparative study between the UAE law and the Vienna Convention, University of Sharjah Journal of forensic and Legal Sciences, University of Sharjah, UA.
XI. Al-Obaidi, Nihaya Mutar, artificial intelligence classifiers, and the possibility of protection by copyright law, Tikrit University Journal of law, Iraq, Volume (5), 2021.
XII. Al-Sanhouri, Abdel Razzak, the mediator in explaining the civil law, Part One, sources of commitment, the House of revival of Arab heritage, Lebanon.
XIII. Andrea BERTOLINI and Francesca EPISCOPO, The Expert Group’s Report on Liability for Artificial Intelligence and Other Emerging Digital Technologies: a critical assessment, European Journal of Risk Regulation, 12 (2021).
XIV. Andrea Bertolini, Artificial Intelligence and Civil Liability, op.cit.
XV. Andrea BERTOLINI, Artificial Intelligence and Civil Liability, Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs Directorate-General for Internal Policies - July 2020, available at: www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses.
XVI. Bartosz Brozek , Marek Jakubiec, On the legal responsibility of autonomous machines, Artif Intell Law (2017):DOI 10.1007/s10506-017-9207-8.
XVII. Borne Killian: “Faut- il une personnalité juridique Propre au Robot? 2 Mars 2018, available at: http://master-ip-it-leblog.fr/faut-il-une-personnalite-juridique-propre-au-robot/.
XVIII. Bryan Casey, Mark A. Lemley,You Might Be a Robot, Cornell Law Review, Vol. 105:287, 2019.
XIX. Calo, Ryan and others, Robot Law, Edward Elgar publishing, Cheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA, USA, 2016.
XX. Calo. Ryan, Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw, California Law Review, vol: 103-513, (2015).
XXI. Caroline cuffman, Robo-liability: the European Union in search of the best way to deal with liability for damage caused by artificial intelligence, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2018.
XXII. Christiane Wendehorst, Strict Liability for AI and other Emerging Technologies, Journal of European Tort Law, 2020.
XXIII. Christina Mulligan, REVENGE AGAINST ROBOTS, SOUTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW, VOL. 69, 2018.
XXIV. COULD SUPER ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BE, IN SOME SENSE, ALIVE? Available at: https://mindmatters.ai/2020/07/could-super-artificial-intelligence-be-in-some-sense-alive, quoted from BEN DICKSON, “WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN WE REACH THE AI SINGULARITY?” AT THENEXTWEB, JULY 7, 2020.
XXV. Davorin Pichler, Dražen Tomić, CIVIL LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY A ROBOT WHEN PERFORMING A MEDICAL PROCEDURE, This paper was presented at the International Scientific Conference “Law and Digitalization”, held at the Faculty of Law, University of Niš, 23-24th April 2021.
XXVI. Eleanore Hickman, Martin Petrin, Trustworthy AI and Corporate Governance: The EU’s Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artifcial Intelligence from a Company Law Perspective, European Business Organization Law Review (2021) 22:593–625 ,https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-021-00224-0.
XXVII. Elisabeth Hildt, Artificial Intelligence: Does Consciousness Matter? Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology, 2019.
XXVIII. Enrico Francesconi, The winter, the summer and the summer dream of artifcial intelligence in law Presidential address to the 18th International Conference on Artifcial Intelligence and Law, Artifcial Intelligence and Law, 2022, springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-022-09309-8?msclkid=b9e39db6a88411ec8404cf66820a1d71.
XXIX. European Commission (2018b) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Artificial intelligence for Europe. COM (2018) 237 final (25 April 2018)
XXX. European Commission (2019a) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Building trust in human-centric artificial intelligence. COM (2019) 168 final (8 April 2019(.
XXXI. Fatah al-Bab, Mohamed Rabie, the legal nature of civil liability for robot damage: a comparative Analytical Study, Journal of legal and Economic Research, Mansoura University-college of Law, Egypt, special issue, 2021.
XXXII. Filipe Maia Alexandre, The Legal Status of Artificially Intelligent Robots Personhood, Taxation and Control, Degree of Master of Laws (LL.M.) in International Business Law, Tilburg University, 2017.
XXXIII. Gerhard Wagner, ROBOT, INC.: PERSONHOOD FOR AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS? FORDHAM LAW REVIEW, 2019.
XXXIV. Giovanni Sartor, Cognitive automata and the law, December 16, 2003, Bing, J. and G. Sartor.. The Law of Electronic Agents, 67-114. Olso: Unipubskriftserier, 2003.
XXXV. Graham, Kyle, Of Frightened Horses and Autonomous Vehicles: Tort Law and its Assimilation of Innovations, Santa Clara Law review, vol: 52, (2012).
XXXVI. Guerra, Alice and others, Liability for robots I: legal challenges, Journal of Institutional Economics (2021), Cambridge University Press.
XXXVII. Hartini Saripan, Are Robots Human? A Review of the Legal Personality Model, World Applied Sciences Journal 34 (6), 2016.
XXXVIII. Hassler S (2017) Do we have to build robots that need rights? IEEE Spectr 54(3):6. https://doi.org/10. 1109/mspec.2017.7864739.
XXXIX. Horst Eidenmüller, the Rise of Robots and the Law of Humans, Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 27/2017.
XL. Ibrahim, Hafez Jafar, autonomous vehicles: issues of regulation and civil liability focusing on some of the leading laws, Kuwait International Law College Journal, Kuwait, 2020.
XLI. Ingar Brinck , Christian Balkenius , Mutual Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction: a Deflationary Account , Philosophy & Technology (2020) , https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0339-x.
XLII. Iria Giuffrida, LIABILITY FOR AI DECISION-MAKING: SOME LEGAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS, FORDHAM LAW REVIEW, Vol. 88, 2019.
XLIII. Jaap Hage, Theoretical foundations for the responsibility of autonomous agents, Artif Intell Law (2017) 25:255–271, DOI 10.1007/s10506-017-9208-7.
XLIV. Jacob van Kokswijk, Granting Personality to a Virtual Identity, International Journal of Humanities and Social sciences, vol: 3, 2008.
XLV. Jiahong Chen, Paul Burgess, The boundaries of legal personhood: how spontaneous intelligence can problematise differences between humans, artificial intelligence, companies and animals, Artificial Intelligence and Law (2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-018-9229-x.
XLVI. Joanna J. Bryson, Mihailis E. Diamantis, and Thomas D. Grant, of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons, Artif Intell Law (2017): DOI 10.1007/s10506-017-9214-9.
XLVII. John Danaher, Robots, Law and the Retribution Gap, Ethics and Information Technology volume 18, (2016), www.researchgate.net/publication/303355500_Robots_law_and_the_retribution_gap/link/5a31a951458515afb67e6ffc/download.
XLVIII. Kate Darling, MIT, Extending Legal Rights to Social Robots, We Robot Conference, University of Miami April 2012.
XLIX. Katja Grace, John Salvatier, Allan Dafoe, Baobao Zhang, Owain Evan, When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence from AI Experts, 2017. Available at: ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:9ef0935d-5ad5-48f7-934b-558f272f50f7?msclkid=26a407d5a7da11eca2481c4f21d7f8c6.
L. Kazuhiko Kawamura, Cognitive Approach to a Human Adaptive Robot Development, International Workshop om Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Proceedings of the institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Hatoyama, Japan, March 4-5,2005.
LI. Kevin Rawlinson, 'Microsoft's Bill Gates Insists AI Is A Threat' BBC (2015) accessed 18 /1/ 2022. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/31047780.
LII. Mark Coeckelbergh, Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration, Ethics Inf Technol (2010).
LIII. Mohammed, Amr Taha Badawi, the legal system of intelligent robots equipped with artificial intelligence technology (UAE as a model) a comparative analytical study of the rules of civil law for robots issued by the European Union in 2017 and the draft code of ethics of the Korean robot, Journal of legal and economic studies, Sadat City University, Egypt, Vol. 7, 2021.
LIV. Mojahed, Mohammed Ahmed maadawi, civil responsibility for robots with artificial intelligence "a comparative study", legal journal, Cairo University, college of law-Khartoum branch, Vol. 9, 2021.
LV. MONIKA SIMMLER, NORA MARKWALDER, GUILTY ROBOTS? – RETHINKING THE NATURE OF CULPABILITY AND LEGAL PERSONHOOD IN AN AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, Criminal Law Forum, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-018-9360-0.
LVI. N. Nevejans, Traité de droit et d’éthique de la robotique civile, LEH édition, Bordeaux, Coll. Science, éthique et société, 2017.
LVII. Nataliia Martsenko, Determining the place of artificial intelligence in civil law, UWM Studia Prawnoustrojowe , DOI: 10.31648/sp.5279.
LVIII. Pagallo, Ugo, the Laws of Robots Crimes, Contracts, and Torts, Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London, 2013.
LIX. par Jean-Jacques Urvoas, garde des sceaux, ministre de la justice suite à la consultation publique menée d’avril à juillet 2016, available at: www.textes.justice.gouv.fr/textes-soumis-a-concertation-10179/projet-de-reforme-du-droit-de-la-responsabilite-civile-29782.html.
LX. Penrose R (1989). The emperor’s new mind: concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, available at: The emperor's new mind: Roger Penrose: Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming: Internet Archive.
LXI. Peter singer, SPECIESISM AND MORAL STATUs, Vol. 40, July 2009, Metaphilosophy LLC and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
LXII. PROJET DE REFORME DE LA RESPONSABILITE CIVILE Mars 2017 présenté le 13 mars 2017.
LXIII. Richard Kelley and others, Liability in Robotics: An International Perspective on Robots as Animals, Advanced Robotics journal ,Volume 24, - Issue 13, 2010, available at: www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1163/016918610X527194.
LXIV. S M. Solaiman, Legal personality of robots, corporations, idols and chimpanzees: a quest for legitimacy, (2017). Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts.
LXV. Sandra Oliveira, La responsabilité civile dans les cas de dommages causés par les robots d’assistance au Québec, Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maître en droit (LL.M.), Université de Montréal, 2016.
LXVI. Sergio Avila Negri, Robot as Legal Person: Electronic Personhood in Robotics and Artificial Intelligence, Ethics in Robotics and Artificial Intelligence: a section of the Journal Frontiers in Robotics and AI, December 2021.
LXVII. SIMON CHESTERMAN, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE LIMITS OF LEGAL PERSONALITY, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol 69, October 2020.
LXVIII. Soussi, Hassan, reflections on the legal personality of a robot: an attempt at constructing a theory, Journal of civil justice, Morocco, 2020.
LXIX. Stamatis Karnouskos, Symbiosis with artifcial intelligence via the prism of law, robots, and society, Artifcial Intelligence and Law (2022) 30:93–115: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09289-1.
LXX. Stanley Greenstein, Preserving the rule of law in the era of artificial intelligence (AI), Artificial Intelligence and Law Journal, 2021, Available at: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-021-09294-4.
LXXI. Stephen Hawking: 'Transcendence Looks At The Implications Of Artificial Intelligence - But Are We Taking AI Seriously Enough?' The Independent (2014).
LXXII. Twaig, omri rachum WHOSE ROBOT IS IT ANYWAY? LIABILITY FOR ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE BASED ROBOTS, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW, Vol. 2020.
LXXIII. Twaig, Omri Rachum, op.cit, ,. Anat Lior, AI Entities as AI Agents: Artificial Intelligence Liability and the AI Respondeat Superior Analogy, Mitchell Hamline Law Review, Vol. 46, Issue. 5 [2020].
LXXIV. Trevor N. White and Seth D. Baum, Liability Law for Present and Future Robotics Technology, Robot Ethics 2.0, Oxford University Press, 2017.
LXXV. Yi, Zeng, and others, Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles, Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Artificial Intelligence Safety (AAAI-Safe AI 2019), 2019.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
