Pub Date : 2023-12-08DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2287390
A. Pastra, T. Johansson, Vera Alexandropoulou, Nikoletta L. Trivyza, Klimanthia Kontaxaki
{"title":"Addressing the hazards of remote inspection techniques: a safety-net for vessel surveys","authors":"A. Pastra, T. Johansson, Vera Alexandropoulou, Nikoletta L. Trivyza, Klimanthia Kontaxaki","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2287390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2287390","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"20 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138587530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2265270
Nadya Purtova, Gijs van Maanen
This paper provides a systematic and critical review of the economics literature on data as an economic good and draws lessons for data governance. We conclude that focusing on data as an economic good in governance efforts is hardwired to only result in more data production and cannot deliver other societal goals contrary to what is often claimed in the literature and policy. Data governance is often a red herring which distracts from other digital problems. The governance of digital society cannot rely exclusively on data-centric economic models. We review the literatures and the underlying empirical and political claims concerning data commons. While commons thinking is useful to frame digital problems in terms of ecologies, it has important limitations. We propose a political-ecological approach to governing the digital society, defined by ecological thinking about governance problems and the awareness of the political nature of framing the problems and mapping their ecological makeup.
{"title":"Data as an economic good, data as a commons, and data governance","authors":"Nadya Purtova, Gijs van Maanen","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2265270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2265270","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a systematic and critical review of the economics literature on data as an economic good and draws lessons for data governance. We conclude that focusing on data as an economic good in governance efforts is hardwired to only result in more data production and cannot deliver other societal goals contrary to what is often claimed in the literature and policy. Data governance is often a red herring which distracts from other digital problems. The governance of digital society cannot rely exclusively on data-centric economic models. We review the literatures and the underlying empirical and political claims concerning data commons. While commons thinking is useful to frame digital problems in terms of ecologies, it has important limitations. We propose a political-ecological approach to governing the digital society, defined by ecological thinking about governance problems and the awareness of the political nature of framing the problems and mapping their ecological makeup.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135271048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245680
A. Buick
ABSTRACT Trade marks lower the search costs of consumers by providing a convenient mental shortcut for whether a product is likely to have desirable or undesirable qualities; a well-known trade mark is thus valuable in part because it provides a substantial reduction in consumer search costs. This article argues that technological progress – in particular, the rise of the internet – has led to a widespread reduction in consumer search costs, and that this has consequently diminished (and will continue to diminish) the value of some well-known trade marks because they now provide a comparatively smaller reduction in search costs. The article discusses a range of empirical studies which suggest that this trend has already had an observable impact on trade mark value in some areas, and considers how the impact of this trend is likely to vary between different trade marks.
{"title":"In search of value: trade marks and search costs in the age of the Internet","authors":"A. Buick","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245680","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245680","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Trade marks lower the search costs of consumers by providing a convenient mental shortcut for whether a product is likely to have desirable or undesirable qualities; a well-known trade mark is thus valuable in part because it provides a substantial reduction in consumer search costs. This article argues that technological progress – in particular, the rise of the internet – has led to a widespread reduction in consumer search costs, and that this has consequently diminished (and will continue to diminish) the value of some well-known trade marks because they now provide a comparatively smaller reduction in search costs. The article discusses a range of empirical studies which suggest that this trend has already had an observable impact on trade mark value in some areas, and considers how the impact of this trend is likely to vary between different trade marks.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"435 - 452"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41566301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245684
Maushumi Bhattacharjee, Chris Kaposy, Maura R. Grossman, Zack Marshall
ABSTRACT Patient photographs published in medical journals have been found on Google Images in two studies, raising concerns about informed consent and patient privacy. It is unlikely that patient informed consent includes consideration of these circumstances, as there are no uniform guidelines for obtaining consent for the publishing of clinical photographs across online medical journals. Health data privacy legislation in the EU, US, and Canada is only concerned with identifiable patient photographs, and their guidelines for deidentification are inconsistent. Patients have limited legal recourse in such cases, as the liability of search engines, publishers, and clinicians is unclear under law. Better informed consent and publication practices, as well as ethical dissemination of sensitive information online by tech companies, are necessary to address these issues.
{"title":"Patient photographs on Google Images: a commentary on informed consent, copyright, and privacy laws","authors":"Maushumi Bhattacharjee, Chris Kaposy, Maura R. Grossman, Zack Marshall","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245684","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Patient photographs published in medical journals have been found on Google Images in two studies, raising concerns about informed consent and patient privacy. It is unlikely that patient informed consent includes consideration of these circumstances, as there are no uniform guidelines for obtaining consent for the publishing of clinical photographs across online medical journals. Health data privacy legislation in the EU, US, and Canada is only concerned with identifiable patient photographs, and their guidelines for deidentification are inconsistent. Patients have limited legal recourse in such cases, as the liability of search engines, publishers, and clinicians is unclear under law. Better informed consent and publication practices, as well as ethical dissemination of sensitive information online by tech companies, are necessary to address these issues.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"536 - 557"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45951296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245675
O. Bakiner
ABSTRACT This paper asks how lawmakers and other stakeholders envision the potential benefits and challenges arising from Artificial Intelligence (AI). A close reading of the European Union's draft AI Act, a bill proposed by the European Commission in April 2021, and of 302 response papers submitted by NGOs, businesses and business associations, trade unions, academics, public authorities, and citizens, shows that pluralistic sociotechnical imaginaries contest: (1) the essential characteristics of technology as they relate to society, politics, and law; (2) whether, how and how much law can enable, direct or constrain scientific & technological developments; and (3) the degree to which law does and should intervene into scientific & technological controversies. The feedback from stakeholders reveals major disagreements with the lawmakers in terms of how the relevant characteristics of AI should influence legal regulation, what the desired law should look like, and whether and how the law should intervene into expert debates in AI. What is more, different types of stakeholders diverge considerably in what they problematise and how they do so.
{"title":"Pluralistic sociotechnical imaginaries in Artificial Intelligence (AI) law: the case of the European Union’s AI Act","authors":"O. Bakiner","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245675","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245675","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper asks how lawmakers and other stakeholders envision the potential benefits and challenges arising from Artificial Intelligence (AI). A close reading of the European Union's draft AI Act, a bill proposed by the European Commission in April 2021, and of 302 response papers submitted by NGOs, businesses and business associations, trade unions, academics, public authorities, and citizens, shows that pluralistic sociotechnical imaginaries contest: (1) the essential characteristics of technology as they relate to society, politics, and law; (2) whether, how and how much law can enable, direct or constrain scientific & technological developments; and (3) the degree to which law does and should intervene into scientific & technological controversies. The feedback from stakeholders reveals major disagreements with the lawmakers in terms of how the relevant characteristics of AI should influence legal regulation, what the desired law should look like, and whether and how the law should intervene into expert debates in AI. What is more, different types of stakeholders diverge considerably in what they problematise and how they do so.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"558 - 582"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48351572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2254585
Daniel Seng Kiat-Boon
{"title":"Correction","authors":"Daniel Seng Kiat-Boon","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2254585","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2254585","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"1 - 1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48219108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683
Lena Enqvist
ABSTRACT Human oversight has been much stressed and discussed as a safeguarding measure to ensure human centrism in AI deployment. Through its proposal of a new EU Artificial Intelligence Act, the Commission is breaking new ground by promoting the introduction of the first general and sharp worded human oversight requirement over AI systems in European law. This Article discusses the content, limitations and implications of this oversight requirement. It does this by addressing the questions of what the Regulation prescribes on ‘what’ is to be overviewed, ‘when’ the overview is to be exercised and ‘by whom’. The article points to some of the AIA’s unclarities and gaps, and to the implications of vesting too much trust in providers to secure the oversight infrastructure of high-risk AI systems.
{"title":"‘Human oversight’ in the EU artificial intelligence act: what, when and by whom?","authors":"Lena Enqvist","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Human oversight has been much stressed and discussed as a safeguarding measure to ensure human centrism in AI deployment. Through its proposal of a new EU Artificial Intelligence Act, the Commission is breaking new ground by promoting the introduction of the first general and sharp worded human oversight requirement over AI systems in European law. This Article discusses the content, limitations and implications of this oversight requirement. It does this by addressing the questions of what the Regulation prescribes on ‘what’ is to be overviewed, ‘when’ the overview is to be exercised and ‘by whom’. The article points to some of the AIA’s unclarities and gaps, and to the implications of vesting too much trust in providers to secure the oversight infrastructure of high-risk AI systems.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"508 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44138442","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245678
Thomas Buocz, S. Pfotenhauer, Iris Eisenberger
ABSTRACT This paper explores the regulatory sandbox regime under the EU’s draft Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act. It investigates how useful the sandbox regime is for testing an AI-based skin cancer detection systems in an EU member state. The paper focuses on whether the proposed AI regulatory sandbox regime can resolve tensions between innovation and safety. Although we find considerable potential for the sandbox regime, the proposal also creates several legal issues. It blurs jurisdictional boundaries between the EU and member states, raises concerns of legality and equal treatment, creates liability risks for innovators, and fails to require informed consent from testing subjects. To address these problems, the paper suggests adopting a more targeted legal basis for the sandbox regime that takes inspiration from conventional testing mechanisms such as clinical investigations for medical devices.
{"title":"Regulatory sandboxes in the AI Act: reconciling innovation and safety?","authors":"Thomas Buocz, S. Pfotenhauer, Iris Eisenberger","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245678","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper explores the regulatory sandbox regime under the EU’s draft Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act. It investigates how useful the sandbox regime is for testing an AI-based skin cancer detection systems in an EU member state. The paper focuses on whether the proposed AI regulatory sandbox regime can resolve tensions between innovation and safety. Although we find considerable potential for the sandbox regime, the proposal also creates several legal issues. It blurs jurisdictional boundaries between the EU and member states, raises concerns of legality and equal treatment, creates liability risks for innovators, and fails to require informed consent from testing subjects. To address these problems, the paper suggests adopting a more targeted legal basis for the sandbox regime that takes inspiration from conventional testing mechanisms such as clinical investigations for medical devices.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"357 - 389"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49122521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245679
Hui Chia, Daniel Beck, J. Paterson, Julian Savulescu
ABSTRACT Artificially intelligent machines are increasingly capable of accomplishing tasks that have until now been considered exclusively human abilities. One such task is the ability to invent. In 2021, an Australian court became the first court in the world to recognise an Artificially Intelligent system as the inventor in a patent application, raising the question of whether AI systems could be considered the responsible actor of their actions, instead of the human using the AI. This paper examines the question of autonomy: how the concept of autonomy underpins the granting of legal rights to humans, and whether it is justified to grant legal rights to AI systems that are autonomous. We propose that there are two distinct and separate concepts of autonomy, Person Autonomy and Machine Autonomy, and that this distinction can guide how the law should treat AI systems.
{"title":"Autonomous AI: what does autonomy mean in relation to persons or machines?","authors":"Hui Chia, Daniel Beck, J. Paterson, Julian Savulescu","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245679","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 Artificially intelligent machines are increasingly capable of accomplishing tasks that have until now been considered exclusively human abilities. One such task is the ability to invent. In 2021, an Australian court became the first court in the world to recognise an Artificially Intelligent system as the inventor in a patent application, raising the question of whether AI systems could be considered the responsible actor of their actions, instead of the human using the AI. This paper examines the question of autonomy: how the concept of autonomy underpins the granting of legal rights to humans, and whether it is justified to grant legal rights to AI systems that are autonomous. We propose that there are two distinct and separate concepts of autonomy, Person Autonomy and Machine Autonomy, and that this distinction can guide how the law should treat AI systems.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"390 - 410"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49361394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245677
C. Tan, Daniel Seng Kiat-Boon
ABSTRACT Just as the evolution of the Internet has transformed the way people live and work, so too the next significant iteration of the Internet, commonly referred to as the Metaverse, which the authors suggest will go beyond the Internet as a sort of successor state to the Internet, will also lead to significant societal change. This paper considers a number of issues that are likely to test the law and its response including in the areas of online wrongs, intellectual property and digital assets.
{"title":"The Metaverse beyond the internet","authors":"C. Tan, Daniel Seng Kiat-Boon","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245677","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Just as the evolution of the Internet has transformed the way people live and work, so too the next significant iteration of the Internet, commonly referred to as the Metaverse, which the authors suggest will go beyond the Internet as a sort of successor state to the Internet, will also lead to significant societal change. This paper considers a number of issues that are likely to test the law and its response including in the areas of online wrongs, intellectual property and digital assets.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"313 - 356"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46462584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：