RECOGNIZING RIGHT: THE STATUS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.
Saved in:
| Title: | RECOGNIZING RIGHT: THE STATUS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | MATHISON, TANNER W.1 |
| Source: | Journal of Business & Technology Law. 2023, Vol. 19 Issue 1, p105-172. 68p. |
| Subjects: | Artificial intelligence, Technological innovations, Customary law, Free will & determinism, Enslaved women, Rights |
| Abstract: | The emergence of sophisticated Artificial Intelligence ("AI") requires that we reexamine its status as property and consider creating a form of legal personhood for AI. Throughout history, societies crafted custom legal personalities to address legal gaps, regulate new organizations, govern emerging technologies, and exercise social control. In the past, the law subjugated women and enslaved peoples under bespoke legal personas, each with its own distinct blend of rights and duties. The recent, laudable expansion of full personhood to all natural persons obscures the history of employing creative quasi-personhood forms to structure and organize the objects of the law. Personhood may be used to define an entity's unique bundle of rights and responsibilities, as it currently does for corporations and children. Legal personalities do not represent an immutable reality, but rather a series of invented fictions tasked with accomplishing political and practical aims. Legal personality is a tool to designate the rights-bearing units of society. The legal personality regime could be changed, and this Article makes the case that it should be, to provide AI with a new form of quasi-personhood. We need not conclusively resolve questions of AI sentience, free will, and other philosophical questions before giving AI status, just as we have not resolved those questions for natural persons. A custom legal personality should be deployed to integrate AI into our system of laws and to test its capacity to bear rights and duties. Even as mere fiction, tailored personhood for AI will serve legal, practical, and moral ends. By making AIs responsible, we can foster responsible AIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Business & Technology Law is the property of University of Maryland School of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| Abstract: | The emergence of sophisticated Artificial Intelligence ("AI") requires that we reexamine its status as property and consider creating a form of legal personhood for AI. Throughout history, societies crafted custom legal personalities to address legal gaps, regulate new organizations, govern emerging technologies, and exercise social control. In the past, the law subjugated women and enslaved peoples under bespoke legal personas, each with its own distinct blend of rights and duties. The recent, laudable expansion of full personhood to all natural persons obscures the history of employing creative quasi-personhood forms to structure and organize the objects of the law. Personhood may be used to define an entity's unique bundle of rights and responsibilities, as it currently does for corporations and children. Legal personalities do not represent an immutable reality, but rather a series of invented fictions tasked with accomplishing political and practical aims. Legal personality is a tool to designate the rights-bearing units of society. The legal personality regime could be changed, and this Article makes the case that it should be, to provide AI with a new form of quasi-personhood. We need not conclusively resolve questions of AI sentience, free will, and other philosophical questions before giving AI status, just as we have not resolved those questions for natural persons. A custom legal personality should be deployed to integrate AI into our system of laws and to test its capacity to bear rights and duties. Even as mere fiction, tailored personhood for AI will serve legal, practical, and moral ends. By making AIs responsible, we can foster responsible AIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 19415788 |
