Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly taking over the day-to-day activities of human beings as a part of the recent technological revolution that has been set into motion ever since we, as a species, started harnessing the potential these systems have to offer. Even though legal research on AI is not a new phenomenon, due to the increasing “legal injuries” arising out of commercialization of AI, the need for legal regime/framework for the legal accountability of these artificial entities has become a very pertinent issue that needs to be addressed seriously. This research paper shall investigate the possibility of attaching civil as well as criminal liability to AI systems by analysing whether mens rea can be attributed to AI entities and, if so, what could be the legal framework/model(s) for such proposed culpability. The paper acknowledges the limitations of the law in general and criminal law in particular when it comes to holding AI systems criminally responsible. The paper also discusses the legal framework/legal liability model(s) that could be employed for extending the culpability to AI entities and understanding what forms of “punishments” or sanctions would make sense for these entities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Google News: $10 million awarded to family of plant worker killed by robot. https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7KMyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Bu8FAAAAIBAJ&pg=3301. Accessed 15 Dec 2022
Weng, Y.-H., Chen, C.-H., Sun, C.-T.: Toward the human-robot co-existence society: on safety intelligence for next generation robots. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 1, 267–282 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-009-0019-1
Kharpal, A.: Robot with $100 bitcoin buys drugs, gets arrested. https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/21/robot-with-100-bitcoin-buys-drugs-gets-arrested.html. Accessed 15 Dec 2022
BBC News: Uber not criminally liable for self-driving death (2019). https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47468391
Gralla, P.: Amazon Prime and the racist algorithms. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3068622/amazon-prime-and-the-racist-algorithms.html
Funk, D.: Major functions of law in modern society featured. 23 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 23, 257 (1972)
Yu, R., Alì, G.S.: What’s inside the black box? AI challenges for lawyers and researchers. Leg. Inf. Manag. 19, 2–13 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1472669619000021
GR, O.: Black box There’s no way to determine how the algorithm came to your decision. https://towardsdatascience.com/black-box-theres-no-way-to-determine-how-the-algorithm-came-to-your-decision-19c9ee185a8
Dickson, B.: Artificial neural networks are more similar to the brain than they get credit for. https://bdtechtalks.com/2020/06/22/direct-fit-artificial-neural-networks/
Buettgenbach, M.H.: Explain like I’m five: Artificial neurons. https://towardsdatascience.com/explain-like-im-five-artificial-neurons-b7c475b56189
Hutson, M.: Self-taught artificial intelligence beats doctors at predicting heart attacks. https://www.science.org/content/article/self-taught-artificial-intelligence-beats-doctors-predicting-heart-attacks. Accessed 15 Dec 2022
IBM: Explainable AI. https://www.ibm.com/watson/explainable-ai
Thomson, P.: Programming Morality: Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics. https://learn.g2.com/laws-of-robotics
Müller, V.C.: Legal vs. ethical obligations – a comment on the EPSRC’s principles for robotics. Connect. Sci. 29, 137–141 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/09540091.2016.1276516
Bryson, J.J.: The meaning of the EPSRC principles of robotics. Connect. Sci. 29, 130–136 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/09540091.2017.1313817
Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
Bieber, C., Cetera, M.: Vicarious Liability: Legal Definition & Examples – Forbes Advisor. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/personal-injury/vicarious-liability/
Husak, D.: The criminal law as last resort. Oxf. J. Leg. Stud. 24, 207–235 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/24.2.207
Wines, L.: New takes on corporate gamesmanship. J. Bus. Strat. 17(2), 28-30 (1996)
Lemley, M.A., Casey, B.: Remedies for robots. SSRN Electr. J. 86 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3223621
Shah, C.: Sentient AI — Is That What We Really Want?. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4213593. Accessed 15 Dec 2022
Martı́nez-Miranda, J., Aldea, A.: Emotions in human and artificial intelligence. Comput. Hum. Behav. 21, 323–341 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.010
Hallevy, G.: The criminal liability of artificial intelligence entities. SSRN Electr. J. 4, 171 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1564096
Thayer, E.R.: Liability without fault. Harv. Law Rev. 29, 801 (1916). https://doi.org/10.2307/1326124
Harman, E.: Harming as causing harm. In: Wasserman, D., Roberts, M. (eds.) Harming Future Persons: Ethics, Genetics and the Nonidentity Problem. Springer (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5697-0_7
Evas, T.: Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence European added value assessment. European Parliamentary Research Service (2020)
Williams, V.: Litton Industries Inc. (1987)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chandra, R., Sanjaya, K. (2023). Punishing the Unpunishable: A Liability Framework for Artificial Intelligence Systems. In: Motahhir, S., Bossoufi, B. (eds) Digital Technologies and Applications. ICDTA 2023. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 669. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29860-8_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29860-8_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-29859-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-29860-8
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)