检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:李子涵 LI Zi-han(East China Normal University,Shanghai 201100 China)
机构地区:[1]华东师范大学法学院
出 处:《新余学院学报》2019年第6期92-97,共6页Journal of Xinyu University
摘 要:人工智能技术的发展产生了诸多新型法律问题,这些问题的解决需以人工智能法律人格的确立与否作为引导,然而各国实践和学者的观点却多有不同。考虑到在不具有获得独立财产可能性的情况下,人工智能和法人在责任承担上存在着本质的区别,因而不能简单类比法人人格以确定人工智能的法律人格。并且人工智能法律人格的确立会使得刑法关系在内的诸多社会关系产生复杂的变化而导致整个人类社会体系的混乱。所以在利弊权衡之下,较为妥善的处理方式应是遵循最小化原则和人工智能的工具属性,在现有法律体系框架内适当创新以解决问题。The development of AI technology has brought about many new legal problems.The solution of these problems needs to be guided by the establishment of AI legal personality.However,there are many differences in practice and scholars'opinions in different countries.Considering that there are essential differences between AI and legal person in responsibility assuming without the possibility of obtaining independent property,it is not possible to simply analogize legal person personality to determine AI legal personality.And the establishment of artificial intelligence legal personality will make many social relations,including criminal law relations,produce complex changes and lead to the chaos of the whole human social system.Therefore,under the balance of pros and cons,a more appropriate approach should follow the principle of minimization and the attributes of AI tools,and make appropriate innovations within the framework of the existing legal system to solve the problem.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15