已入深夜,您辛苦了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整地填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!祝你早点完成任务,早点休息,好梦!

The European AI liability directives – Critique of a half-hearted approach and lessons for the future

责任 指令 产品责任 法律与经济学 欧洲联盟 严格责任 业务 危害 法学 政治学 经济 计算机科学 国际贸易 程序设计语言
作者
Philipp Hacker
出处
期刊:Computer Law & Security Review [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:51: 105871-105871 被引量:30
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105871
摘要

The optimal liability framework for AI systems remains an unsolved problem across the globe. With ChatGPT and other large generative models taking the technology to the next level, solutions are urgently needed. In a much-anticipated move, the European Commission advanced two proposals outlining the European approach to AI liability in September 2022: a novel AI Liability Directive (AILD) and a revision of the Product Liability Directive (PLD). They constitute the final cornerstone of AI regulation in the EU. Crucially, the liability proposals and the proposed EU AI Act are inherently intertwined: the latter does not contain any individual rights of affected persons, and the former lack specific, substantive rules on AI development and deployment. Taken together, these acts may well trigger a "Brussels effect" in AI regulation, with significant consequences for the US and other countries. Against this background, this paper makes three novel contributions. First, it examines in detail the liability proposals and shows that, while making steps in the right direction, they ultimately represent a half-hearted approach: if enacted as foreseen, AI liability in the EU will primarily rest on disclosure of evidence mechanisms and a set of narrowly defined presumptions concerning fault, defectiveness and causality. Hence, second, the article suggests amendments to the proposed AI liability framework. They are collected in a concise Annex at the end of the paper. I argue, inter alia, that the dichotomy between the fault-based AILD Proposal and the supposedly strict liability PLD Proposal is fictional and should be abandoned; that an EU framework for AI liability should comprise one fully harmonizing regulation instead of two insufficiently coordinated directives; and that the current proposals unjustifiably collapse fundamental distinctions between social and individual risk by equating high-risk AI systems in the AI Act with those under the liability framework. Third, based on an analysis of the key risks AI poses, the final part of the paper maps out a road for the future of AI liability and regulation, in the EU and beyond. More specifically, I make four key proposals. Effective compensation should be ensured by combining truly strict liability for certain high-risk AI systems with general presumptions of defectiveness, fault and causality in cases involving SMEs or non-high-risk AI systems. The paper introduces a novel distinction between illegitimate- and legitimate-harm models to delineate strict liability's scope. Truly strict liability should be reserved for high-risk AI systems that, from a social perspective, should not cause harm (illegitimate-harm models, e.g., autonomous vehicles or medical AI). Models meant to cause some unavoidable harm by ranking and rejecting individuals (legitimate-harm models, e.g., credit scoring or insurance scoring) may merely face rebuttable presumptions of defectiveness and causality. General-purpose AI systems and Foundation Models should only be subjected to high-risk regulation, including liability for high-risk AI systems, in specific high-risk use cases for which they are deployed. Consumers, in turn, ought to be liable based on regular fault, in general. Furthermore, innovation and legal certainty should be fostered through a comprehensive regime of safe harbours, defined quantitatively to the best extent possible. Moreover, trustworthy AI remains an important goal for AI regulation. Hence, the liability framework must specifically extend to non-discrimination cases and provide for clear rules concerning explainability (XAI). Finally, awareness for the climate effects of AI, and digital technology more broadly, is rapidly growing in computer science. In diametrical opposition to this shift in discourse and understanding, however, EU legislators have long neglected environmental sustainability in both the draft AI Act and the proposed liability regime. To counter this, I propose to jump-start sustainable AI regulation via sustainability impact assessments in the AI Act and sustainable design defects in the liability regime. In this way, the law may help spur not only fair AI and XAI, but also sustainable AI (SAI).
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
Nowind完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
2秒前
3秒前
4秒前
曹大壮完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
兆兆完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
edisondc发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
菜头完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
12秒前
14秒前
Smiling应助文茵采纳,获得10
15秒前
星辰大海应助饭ff采纳,获得10
15秒前
17秒前
wab完成签到,获得积分0
17秒前
酷波er应助雪白的夏山采纳,获得10
19秒前
leezh完成签到,获得积分10
20秒前
Trtr7985发布了新的文献求助10
21秒前
慕青应助漂亮白枫采纳,获得10
22秒前
华仔应助VIAI采纳,获得10
27秒前
27秒前
30秒前
笑而不语完成签到 ,获得积分10
30秒前
辛苦科研人完成签到 ,获得积分10
31秒前
32秒前
36秒前
恋雅颖月应助称心的思卉采纳,获得10
37秒前
yinjw发布了新的文献求助30
37秒前
WuYiHHH发布了新的文献求助10
37秒前
活泼的面包完成签到 ,获得积分10
41秒前
loong发布了新的文献求助10
42秒前
43秒前
orixero应助1234采纳,获得10
47秒前
47秒前
希望天下0贩的0应助loong采纳,获得10
47秒前
zsw发布了新的文献求助10
52秒前
56秒前
58秒前
59秒前
ding应助Iris采纳,获得10
1分钟前
难过大神发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
高分求助中
A new approach to the extrapolation of accelerated life test data 1000
ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, 12th edition 500
Indomethacinのヒトにおける経皮吸収 400
Phylogenetic study of the order Polydesmida (Myriapoda: Diplopoda) 370
基于可调谐半导体激光吸收光谱技术泄漏气体检测系统的研究 350
Robot-supported joining of reinforcement textiles with one-sided sewing heads 320
Aktuelle Entwicklungen in der linguistischen Forschung 300
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3989868
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3531994
关于积分的说明 11255752
捐赠科研通 3270793
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1805053
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 882215
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 809208