Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245681
Brendon Murphy, B. Arnold, W. Bonython
ABSTRACT Technology has long played a role in law enforcement. It is often used to identify suspects and obtain evidence used in subsequent prosecution. With advances in facial recognition technology, population-scale identification and the emergence of systems that enable physical capture without human intervention, we question whether automated arrest is lawful and likely. This article theorises aspects of the automation of arrest in a world of ‘smart portals’, pervasive panopticism and driverless vehicles. It considers technologies, legalities and implications. In doing so it engages with automation as ‘soft power’, a proxy for the state’s lawful use of physical force. It concludes that automated arrest is highly likely, in many instances legal, and with an imperative need for regulation.
{"title":"Theorising automated arrest: possible, likely and lawful?","authors":"Brendon Murphy, B. Arnold, W. Bonython","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245681","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245681","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Technology has long played a role in law enforcement. It is often used to identify suspects and obtain evidence used in subsequent prosecution. With advances in facial recognition technology, population-scale identification and the emergence of systems that enable physical capture without human intervention, we question whether automated arrest is lawful and likely. This article theorises aspects of the automation of arrest in a world of ‘smart portals’, pervasive panopticism and driverless vehicles. It considers technologies, legalities and implications. In doing so it engages with automation as ‘soft power’, a proxy for the state’s lawful use of physical force. It concludes that automated arrest is highly likely, in many instances legal, and with an imperative need for regulation.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"453 - 489"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42532903","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: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245673
B. Chichaibelu, H. Baumüller, M.A. Matschuck
ABSTRACT With the rapid spread of digital tools that collect large amounts of data from agricultural producers across Africa, there is a growing need to strike a balance between data protection and use. To inform this debate, this article examines the level of and demand for the protection of data collected from African producers. To this end, the article presents a review of national personal data protection laws in Africa and assesses compliance of digital agricultural service providers with these laws. It also offers a first insight into perceptions on personal data protection among African agricultural producers. The analysis shows that data privacy regulations in Africa have been evolving, but several countries have yet to adopt related legislation. Existing laws generally reflect the basic elements of the 2014 African Union Convention on personal data protection, but often fall short on provisions of particular importance to digital service provision. Compliance with national data privacy laws among digital agricultural service providers is limited, highlighting enforcement challenges. Awareness of data protection issues is low among agricultural producers, as is the ability to control access to their data.
{"title":"Protecting the data of African agricultural producers: a review of national laws, compliance and perceptions","authors":"B. Chichaibelu, H. Baumüller, M.A. Matschuck","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245673","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT With the rapid spread of digital tools that collect large amounts of data from agricultural producers across Africa, there is a growing need to strike a balance between data protection and use. To inform this debate, this article examines the level of and demand for the protection of data collected from African producers. To this end, the article presents a review of national personal data protection laws in Africa and assesses compliance of digital agricultural service providers with these laws. It also offers a first insight into perceptions on personal data protection among African agricultural producers. The analysis shows that data privacy regulations in Africa have been evolving, but several countries have yet to adopt related legislation. Existing laws generally reflect the basic elements of the 2014 African Union Convention on personal data protection, but often fall short on provisions of particular importance to digital service provision. Compliance with national data privacy laws among digital agricultural service providers is limited, highlighting enforcement challenges. Awareness of data protection issues is low among agricultural producers, as is the ability to control access to their data.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"617 - 661"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49537799","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: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245682
Kamil Mamak, Jadwiga Glanc
ABSTRACT Expungement, which traditionally permitted reintegration into society and the turning over of a new leaf – thus giving a second chance to people who had had the misfortune to fall foul of criminal justice systems – is a legal institution that is currently being undermined. As the cyber-vetting of potential employees is a growing trend, employers readily turn to the internet in order to seek information about job candidates. In this article, the role of expungement in legal systems and society will be examined, as well as the changing reality that is undermining expungement, in order to determine how the issue of expungement should be addressed. In particular, the article discusses the possibility of expungement being incorporated in search engines (including AI chatbots) and in the actual design of AI recruitment tools in order to facilitate the re-entry of ex-offenders into the employment marketplace.
{"title":"Expunged ‘by design’: on the potential of AI to be a partial enabler in the expungement process","authors":"Kamil Mamak, Jadwiga Glanc","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245682","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Expungement, which traditionally permitted reintegration into society and the turning over of a new leaf – thus giving a second chance to people who had had the misfortune to fall foul of criminal justice systems – is a legal institution that is currently being undermined. As the cyber-vetting of potential employees is a growing trend, employers readily turn to the internet in order to seek information about job candidates. In this article, the role of expungement in legal systems and society will be examined, as well as the changing reality that is undermining expungement, in order to determine how the issue of expungement should be addressed. In particular, the article discusses the possibility of expungement being incorporated in search engines (including AI chatbots) and in the actual design of AI recruitment tools in order to facilitate the re-entry of ex-offenders into the employment marketplace.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"490 - 507"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45312318","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: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245674
E. Bicudo, I. Brass
ABSTRACT This paper analyses how so-called Brexit, that is the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union (EU), has modified the regional geography of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs). The latter are therapies deriving from cell manipulation, gene editing, tissue engineering, or a combination of these techniques. Their development and delivery have been realised through research collaborations and commercial relations of international scope. In the EU, this has happened by means of a complex distribution of commercial activities and legal responsibilities. With Brexit, three main kinds of reconfigurations have occurred: the relocation of research and manufacturing activities; the reorganisation of quality control tests aimed to manage clinical risks; and the redistribution of legal responsibilities and representatives. This technical and legal reconfiguration is captured here by means of theoretical insights from the emerging domain of legal geography. Drawing on interviews conducted with both EU and UK professionals involved in ATMP development, this paper reveals the main challenges brought by Brexit to the current and future configuration of the ATMP landscape in the EU and the UK. Furthermore, it demonstrates how shifts in legal arrangements impact on science-intensive domains.
{"title":"Advanced therapies and the Brexit process: emerging geographies of legal responsibilities and market opportunities","authors":"E. Bicudo, I. Brass","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245674","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper analyses how so-called Brexit, that is the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union (EU), has modified the regional geography of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs). The latter are therapies deriving from cell manipulation, gene editing, tissue engineering, or a combination of these techniques. Their development and delivery have been realised through research collaborations and commercial relations of international scope. In the EU, this has happened by means of a complex distribution of commercial activities and legal responsibilities. With Brexit, three main kinds of reconfigurations have occurred: the relocation of research and manufacturing activities; the reorganisation of quality control tests aimed to manage clinical risks; and the redistribution of legal responsibilities and representatives. This technical and legal reconfiguration is captured here by means of theoretical insights from the emerging domain of legal geography. Drawing on interviews conducted with both EU and UK professionals involved in ATMP development, this paper reveals the main challenges brought by Brexit to the current and future configuration of the ATMP landscape in the EU and the UK. Furthermore, it demonstrates how shifts in legal arrangements impact on science-intensive domains.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"411 - 434"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44294531","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: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2245676
Petros A. Terzis
ABSTRACT Before rushing into regulating order-enabling computational technologies, is there a different way to think about them? What if power over what can be computed, translates to power over what can be decided? Can we then shape policies for the management of technologies that do not just ‘take’ power, but make it? By reviewing early work of network theorists and Internet scholars as well as literature on the governance of the commons, this paper argues that beyond market, states, and their hybrids and beyond private property and public sector regimes, there exists political space for social practices and transformative legal interventions that can give shape to radically different institutional actions for the management of the world’s infocomputational resources. Programmable commons and the public value of programmability are thus introduced as parts of a broader political project that aspires to democratise access to, and management of these resources. By drawing on the history of a family of commons – namely intellectual commons, infrastructure commons, and global commons – this paper explores the material form and impact of infocomputational technologies and presents a blend of bottom-up and top-down initiatives for their commons-based organisation.
{"title":"Building programmable commons","authors":"Petros A. Terzis","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2245676","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245676","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Before rushing into regulating order-enabling computational technologies, is there a different way to think about them? What if power over what can be computed, translates to power over what can be decided? Can we then shape policies for the management of technologies that do not just ‘take’ power, but make it? By reviewing early work of network theorists and Internet scholars as well as literature on the governance of the commons, this paper argues that beyond market, states, and their hybrids and beyond private property and public sector regimes, there exists political space for social practices and transformative legal interventions that can give shape to radically different institutional actions for the management of the world’s infocomputational resources. Programmable commons and the public value of programmability are thus introduced as parts of a broader political project that aspires to democratise access to, and management of these resources. By drawing on the history of a family of commons – namely intellectual commons, infrastructure commons, and global commons – this paper explores the material form and impact of infocomputational technologies and presents a blend of bottom-up and top-down initiatives for their commons-based organisation.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"583 - 616"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42616231","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 : 2023-03-03DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2184135
Jonas Schuett
The paper argues that the material scope of AI regulations should not rely on the term ‘artificial intelligence (AI)’. The argument is developed by proposing a number of requirements for legal definitions, surveying existing AI definitions, and then discussing the extent to which they meet the proposed requirements. It is shown that existing definitions of AI do not meet the most important requirements for legal definitions. Next, the paper argues that a risk-based approach would be preferable. Rather than using the term AI, policy makers should focus on the specific risks they want to reduce. It is shown that the requirements for legal definitions can be better met by defining the main sources of relevant risks: certain technical approaches (e.g. reinforcement learning), applications (e.g. facial recognition), and capabilities (e.g. the ability to physically interact with the environment). Finally, the paper discusses the extent to which this approach can also be applied to more advanced AI systems.
{"title":"Defining the scope of AI regulations","authors":"Jonas Schuett","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184135","url":null,"abstract":"The paper argues that the material scope of AI regulations should not rely on the term ‘artificial intelligence (AI)’. The argument is developed by proposing a number of requirements for legal definitions, surveying existing AI definitions, and then discussing the extent to which they meet the proposed requirements. It is shown that existing definitions of AI do not meet the most important requirements for legal definitions. Next, the paper argues that a risk-based approach would be preferable. Rather than using the term AI, policy makers should focus on the specific risks they want to reduce. It is shown that the requirements for legal definitions can be better met by defining the main sources of relevant risks: certain technical approaches (e.g. reinforcement learning), applications (e.g. facial recognition), and capabilities (e.g. the ability to physically interact with the environment). Finally, the paper discusses the extent to which this approach can also be applied to more advanced AI systems.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134943453","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 : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2184140
Pınar Çağlayan Aksoy
ABSTRACT Crypto assets and their legal qualification hold an important place in the international legal arena. There are many public and private law aspects of crypto assets that require clarification. The first difficulty lies in defining what a crypto asset is. There are many different taxonomies of crypto assets, and these vary globally. Another challenging area which demands attention is whether crypto assets bear the features of objects of ‘property’ in private law. The answer to this question is important because it affects various areas of law, such as tax law, securities law, insolvency law, contract law, even conflict of laws. This paper focuses on whether and how property law rules should be applied to crypto assets and how the legal nature of crypto assets is embarked upon and handled differently in Common Law and Civil Law Countries.
{"title":"The applicability of property law rules for crypto assets: considerations from civil law and common law perspectives","authors":"Pınar Çağlayan Aksoy","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184140","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Crypto assets and their legal qualification hold an important place in the international legal arena. There are many public and private law aspects of crypto assets that require clarification. The first difficulty lies in defining what a crypto asset is. There are many different taxonomies of crypto assets, and these vary globally. Another challenging area which demands attention is whether crypto assets bear the features of objects of ‘property’ in private law. The answer to this question is important because it affects various areas of law, such as tax law, securities law, insolvency law, contract law, even conflict of laws. This paper focuses on whether and how property law rules should be applied to crypto assets and how the legal nature of crypto assets is embarked upon and handled differently in Common Law and Civil Law Countries.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"185 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45082478","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 : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133
Alejandro E. Camacho
ABSTRACT Climate change has induced an ecological crisis necessitating reconsideration of how the law should manage human interactions with ecological systems. In most Western legal regimes, conservation policy has principally sought to advance historical or natural preservation or sustained yield objectives, while many laws governing biotechnologies focus on minimising exposure to ‘natural’ systems. Meanwhile, Western public processes are largely built on a legal framework that assumes comprehensive rationality at the front end of decision-making. Lastly, prevailing public conservation governance is fragmented, save the limited attempts to consolidate or coordinate decentralised, independent, and/or overlapping authority. The increasingly convulsive effects of climate change and developments in biotechnology bring to stark relief the limitations of prevailing Western public conservation goals, processes, and institutional design. First, promoting biodiversity may require fundamental changes in management to focus on increasing ecological health and other values than consumption, historical fidelity, and nonintervention. Second, integration of adaptive and inclusive processes is imperative for promoting both effective management strategies and learning in the face of unprecedented change. Third, policymakers must appreciate the tradeoffs of allocating authority across the array of institutional structures, and tailor not only the scale of interventions but also the extent of overlap and coordination of authority.
{"title":"In the Anthropocene: adaptive law, ecological health, and biotechnologies","authors":"Alejandro E. Camacho","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Climate change has induced an ecological crisis necessitating reconsideration of how the law should manage human interactions with ecological systems. In most Western legal regimes, conservation policy has principally sought to advance historical or natural preservation or sustained yield objectives, while many laws governing biotechnologies focus on minimising exposure to ‘natural’ systems. Meanwhile, Western public processes are largely built on a legal framework that assumes comprehensive rationality at the front end of decision-making. Lastly, prevailing public conservation governance is fragmented, save the limited attempts to consolidate or coordinate decentralised, independent, and/or overlapping authority. The increasingly convulsive effects of climate change and developments in biotechnology bring to stark relief the limitations of prevailing Western public conservation goals, processes, and institutional design. First, promoting biodiversity may require fundamental changes in management to focus on increasing ecological health and other values than consumption, historical fidelity, and nonintervention. Second, integration of adaptive and inclusive processes is imperative for promoting both effective management strategies and learning in the face of unprecedented change. Third, policymakers must appreciate the tradeoffs of allocating authority across the array of institutional structures, and tailor not only the scale of interventions but also the extent of overlap and coordination of authority.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"280 - 312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46209196","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 : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2184134
Paul Friedl
ABSTRACT For several decades now, legal scholars and other social scientists have been interested in conceiving of technologies as regulatory media and comparing their normative affordances to law’s regulatory characteristics. Recently, scholars have also started to explore the normative nature of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence systems. Most of this scholarship, however, adopts a largely theoretical perspective. This article takes a different approach and attempts to provide the discussion with a more factual grounding. It does so by investigating the construction of one particular Machine Learning system, the content moderation system Perspective API developed by Google. Its open-source development and a voluminous trove of publicly available documentation render Perspective API a virtually unique resource to study the inner logics of Machine Learning systems development. Based on an in-depth analysis of these logics, the article fleshes out similarities and dissimilarities concerning the normative structure of algorithmic and legal systems regarding four different subjects: practical constraints, evaluative diversity, modes of evolution and standards of evaluation. The article then relates the case of Perspective to the European Union’s proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act and shows how the study’s insights might help in readying the Act for the realities of contemporary multi-party AI development.
{"title":"Dis/similarities in the design and development of legal and algorithmic normative systems: the case of Perspective API","authors":"Paul Friedl","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184134","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For several decades now, legal scholars and other social scientists have been interested in conceiving of technologies as regulatory media and comparing their normative affordances to law’s regulatory characteristics. Recently, scholars have also started to explore the normative nature of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence systems. Most of this scholarship, however, adopts a largely theoretical perspective. This article takes a different approach and attempts to provide the discussion with a more factual grounding. It does so by investigating the construction of one particular Machine Learning system, the content moderation system Perspective API developed by Google. Its open-source development and a voluminous trove of publicly available documentation render Perspective API a virtually unique resource to study the inner logics of Machine Learning systems development. Based on an in-depth analysis of these logics, the article fleshes out similarities and dissimilarities concerning the normative structure of algorithmic and legal systems regarding four different subjects: practical constraints, evaluative diversity, modes of evolution and standards of evaluation. The article then relates the case of Perspective to the European Union’s proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act and shows how the study’s insights might help in readying the Act for the realities of contemporary multi-party AI development.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"25 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48329179","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 : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17579961.2023.2184139
J. Rochel
ABSTRACT Despite their importance in the ethics of digital technologies, trust and trustworthiness do not appear in the international law on digital technologies. This surprising absence is the point of departure of this paper. On the basis of a survey of philosophical and empirical scholarship on trust in the context of digital technologies (especially AI), the article proceeds by identifying relevant norms in international law which can be considered to operationalise relevant dimensions of trust and trustworthiness. By clustering these norms, a technical conception of trust appears, focused on securing the trustworthiness of an AI system. This conception is based on the framing of an AI system as an agent and on the premise that the role of the law is to promote the uptake of technologies. This technical conception of trust should be enriched by way of three relevant extensions, each addressing in turn: the responsibility of developers, the power relations between users and developers of AI systems, and the benefits associated with the use of AI systems. This extended conception of trust also extends the realm of relevant legal norms that can be used to address AI-powered actions.
{"title":"Error 404: looking for trust in international law on digital technologies","authors":"J. Rochel","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184139","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite their importance in the ethics of digital technologies, trust and trustworthiness do not appear in the international law on digital technologies. This surprising absence is the point of departure of this paper. On the basis of a survey of philosophical and empirical scholarship on trust in the context of digital technologies (especially AI), the article proceeds by identifying relevant norms in international law which can be considered to operationalise relevant dimensions of trust and trustworthiness. By clustering these norms, a technical conception of trust appears, focused on securing the trustworthiness of an AI system. This conception is based on the framing of an AI system as an agent and on the premise that the role of the law is to promote the uptake of technologies. This technical conception of trust should be enriched by way of three relevant extensions, each addressing in turn: the responsibility of developers, the power relations between users and developers of AI systems, and the benefits associated with the use of AI systems. This extended conception of trust also extends the realm of relevant legal norms that can be used to address AI-powered actions.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"148 - 184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44206454","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：