{"title":"Law by Algorithm","authors":"Ernest Lim","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqad009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This review article offers a critical analysis of Horst Eidenmüller and Gerhard Wagner’s Law by Algorithm by focusing on four major sets of issues that are covered in this important work: (i) separate legal personality for artificial intelligence (AI) systems; (ii) the exploitation and protection of consumers; (iii) liability; and (iv) online dispute resolution. On separate legal personality, it is shown that neither unbundled products nor difficulties in proving that the systems resulted in damage or losses necessarily justify giving legal personality to AI systems. On consumer protection, it is argued that exploitation of consumers can be regulated by consumer protection legislation provided that reforms are made to remove enforcement hurdles. On liability, the issues arising from product liability legislation and problems associated with proving causation are critically examined. On online dispute resolution, smart contracts and self-driving contracts are distinguished, and a distinction is drawn between AI-assisted and AI-substitutionary adjudication.","PeriodicalId":47225,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqad009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This review article offers a critical analysis of Horst Eidenmüller and Gerhard Wagner’s Law by Algorithm by focusing on four major sets of issues that are covered in this important work: (i) separate legal personality for artificial intelligence (AI) systems; (ii) the exploitation and protection of consumers; (iii) liability; and (iv) online dispute resolution. On separate legal personality, it is shown that neither unbundled products nor difficulties in proving that the systems resulted in damage or losses necessarily justify giving legal personality to AI systems. On consumer protection, it is argued that exploitation of consumers can be regulated by consumer protection legislation provided that reforms are made to remove enforcement hurdles. On liability, the issues arising from product liability legislation and problems associated with proving causation are critically examined. On online dispute resolution, smart contracts and self-driving contracts are distinguished, and a distinction is drawn between AI-assisted and AI-substitutionary adjudication.
期刊介绍:
The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.