Posts Tagged ‘Robotics and law’

Legal informatics papers at We Robot 2013 Conference

March 25, 2013

Some legal informatics papers or panels are included in the program for the 2013 We Robot Conference, to be held 8-9 April 2013 at Stanford Law School, in Stanford, California, USA:

Panel: Law as Algorithm
Speakers: Peter Asaro, Lisa Shay, Woodrow Hartzog
Moderator: Harry Surden
Related Papers:
On Implicit and Explicit Legal Requirements for Human Judgment
Do Robots Dream of Electric Laws? An Experiment in Law as Algorithm
[...]

Panel: Designing Values
Speakers: Ergun Calisgan, AJung Moon, Aneta Podsiadla
Moderator: Ian Kerr
Related Papers:
Open Roboethics Pilot: Accelerating Policy Design, Implementation and Demonstration of Socially Acceptable Robot Behaviors
What Robotics Can Learn from the Contemporary Problems of Information Technologies Sector- Compliance and Enforcement of Privacy by Design
[...]

Paper: Programming Robotic Decisions with Potentially Lethal Outcomes: Comparing Self-Driving Cars and Autonomous Weapon Systems, and How They Should Be Regulated as Their Autonomous Capabilities Evolve
Authors: Kenneth Anderson, Matthew Waxman
Commentator: Dan Siciliano (Stanford University Rock Center)

HT @LawandLit

Call for Papers: AICOL 2013: Workshop on AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems

February 9, 2013

A call for papers — with abstract submission deadline of 28 February 2013 and full paper submission deadline of 15 May 2013 — has been issued for AICOL 2013: Workshop on AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems, to be held at a date to be determined, between 21 and 27 July 2013, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

The workshop is being collocated with XXVI. World Congress of Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy.

Papers for AICOL 2013 are invited on the following topics:

  • Law and Science
  • Knowledge Management
  • Law and Cognitive Science
  • Cognitive schemas
  • Law and Complexity Theory
  • Law and Robotics
  • Complex Systems
  • Law and Mathematics
  • Legal Theory
  • Legal Graphic Representation
  • Legal Culture
  • Game Theory
  • Computer Ethics
  • Formalization of Legal Systems and Norms
  • Artificial Societies
  • Rules and Standards
  • Argumentative Frameworks
  • Agreement technologies
  • Legal Ontologies
  • Electronic Institutions
  • Governance
  • Legal Concepts
  • Legal Information Retrieval
  • Legal Thesauri
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Taxonomies
  • Trends in e-Discovery, e-Courts, e-Administration
  • Natural Language Processing (NLP)
  • Legal Knowledge Acquisition
  • Users’ studies
  • Legal Knowledge Representation

For more details, please see the call.

HT Professor Dr. Monica Palmirani

Stanford CIS Panel: Artificial Intelligence: A Legal Perspective

January 8, 2012

A panel on Artificial Intelligence: A Legal Perspective, was held 27 October 2011, at Stanford Law School, Stanford, California, USA. Click here for video of the panel.

The panel discussed many issues respecting artificial intelligence and law, including the legal agency and liability of AIs.

The panelists were Associate Dean Mary-Anne Williams of the University of Technology, Sydney Faculty of Engineering and IT; Professor Dr. Ian Kerr of the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law; Professor John O. McGinnis of the Northwestern University School of Law; and Professor Lawrence Solum of the Georgetown University Law Center. The moderator was Ryan Calo of the Stanford Center for Internet and Society.

The panel was sponsored by the Stanford Center for Internet and Society.

The panel was a follow-up event to Stanford Law School’s 2009 panel entitled Legal Challenges in an Age of Robotics (click here for video).

New on VoxPopuLII: Calo on Open Robotics

July 1, 2011

Ryan Calo, Esq., of the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, has posted Open Robotics, on the VoxPopuLII Blog, published by the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University Law School.

In this post, Mr. Calo explores the transformative potential of robots, and how legal liability arising from robot conduct could inhibit the socially beneficial development of robot technology — particularly robotics developed according to an “open” and “generative” model. Mr. Calo offers a proposal for limiting liability of manufacturers of “open” robots, analogous to liability limitations introduced in order to benefit other transformative industries and technologies, such as aviation and the Internet.

This post will be of interest to those in the robotics, artificial intelligence, and open technology communities, as well as to ethicists, lawyers, and policy makers.

Williams & Calo on Robots & Law

July 25, 2010

Professor Dr. Mary-Anne Williams of the University of Technology, Sydney Innovation & Enterprise Research Laboratory and CodeX: The Stanford Center for Computers and Law, and Ryan Calo, Esq. of the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, discuss robots and the law, on The Week in Law Webcast for 17 July 2010 (TWiL 69: Do Lawyers Dream of Electric Sheep?).

The Webcast hosts are attorneys Denise Howell and Evan Brown.

The discussion addresses legal information processing by robots, and robots’ capability of playing roles in legal institutions, as well as a range of other legal, ethical, and psychological issues respecting robotics.

Hallevy on The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities

May 22, 2010

Dr. Gabriel Hallevy of the Ono Academic College Faculty of Law has posted The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities (2010). Here is a summary:

This article attempts to work out a legal solution to the problem of the criminal liability of AI entities. At the outset, a definition of an AI entity will be presented. Based on that definition, this article will then propose and introduce three models of AI entity criminal liability: the perpetration-by-another liability model, the natural-probable-consequence liability model, and the direct liability model.

These three models might be applied separately, but in many situations, a coordinated combination of them (all or some of them) is required in order to complete the legal structure of criminal liability. Once we examine the possibility of legally imposing criminal liability on AI entities, then the question of punishment must be addressed. How can an AI entity serve a sentence of imprisonment? How can death penalty be imposed on an AI entity? How can probation, a pecuniary fine, etc. be imposed on an AI entity? Consequently, it is necessary to formulate viable forms of punishment in order to impose criminal liability practically on AI entities. [footnotes omitted]

Call for Papers: ECAP 2010 / ECAP 10

February 2, 2010

A call for papers, with extended submission deadline of 7 May 2010 7 April 2010, has been issued for ECAP 2010 / ECAP 10: The 8th European Conference on Computing and Philosophy, to be held 4-6 October 2010, at Technische Universität München, in Munich, Germany.

Papers are invited on the following topics, a number of which include legal informatics or legal communication issues:

  • Information and Knowledge Processing (Distributed Processing, Emergent Properties, Formal Ontology, Network Structures, etc)
  • Philosophy of Computer Science
  • Robotics, AI, and Ambient Intelligence
  • Human-Machine Interaction and Explanation Capabilities
  • Philosophy of Information Technology
  • Neurocomputing and the Problem of Consciousness
  • Computational Linguistics
  • Computer-based Learning and Teaching Strategies and Resources
  • The Impact of Distance Learning on the Teaching of Philosophy and Computing
  • IT, Cultural Diversity and Technoscience Studies
  • Information and Computing Ethics: Roboethics
  • Biocomputing, Artificial Life, Systems Biology
  • Electronic Art
  • Complexity and Emergency
  • Imaging and Knowledge
  • New Models of Logic Software
  • Models & Simulations Epistemology
  • Synthetic emotions
  • Computer & Gender Studies

For more information, please see the call for papers.

HT @WikiCFP.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 105 other followers

%d bloggers like this: