Artificial autonomous agents and the question of electronic personhood: a path between subjectivity and liabilityFootnote^*

* Antonio Iannì: Sections (1), (2), (3), (4). Michael William Monterossi: Sections (5), (6), (6.1), (6.2), (7).

References

• Ethem Alpaydin (2014) Introduction to Machine Learning, MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jack M Balkin (2015) ‘The Path of Robotics Law’ 6 California Law Review 45.
   Google Scholar
• Pietro Barcellona (with the collaboration of Carmelita Camardi) (1996) Diritto privato e società moderna, Jovene.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich Beck (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Mark A Bedau (2014) ‘Artificial Life’ in K Frankish and WM Ramsey (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Randall D Beer (1995) ‘A Dynamical Systems Perspective on Agent-Environment Interaction’ 72 Artificial Intelligence 173. doi: 10.1016/0004-3702(94)00005-L
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenay M Beer et al (2012) ‘Toward a Psychological Framework for Levels of Robot Autonomy in Human-Robot Interaction’ in Technical Report HFA-TR-1204, School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Andrea Bertolini (2013) ‘Robots as Products: The Case for a Realistic Analysis of Robotic Applications and Liability Rules’ 5 Law, Innovation and Technology 214. doi: 10.5235/17579961.5.2.214
   Google Scholar
• Andrea Bertolini et al (2016) ‘On Robots and Insurance’ 8 International Journal of Social Robotics 381. doi: 10.1007/s12369-016-0345-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• William Warwick Buckland (1908) The Roman Law of Slavery: The Condition of the Slave in Private Law from Augustus to Justinian, The University press.
   Google Scholar
• Guido Calabresi (1970) The Costs of Accidents: A Legal and Economic Analysis, Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan Calo (2016) ‘Robots in American Law’, University of Washington School of Law Research Paper No. 2016-04, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2737598.
   Google Scholar
• Olivier Cayla and Yan Thomas (2002) Du Droit de ne pas naître, Gallimard [Italian version: Olivier Cayla and Yan Thomas (2004) Il diritto di non nascere. A proposito del caso Perruche, Giuffrè].
   Google Scholar
• Samir Chopra and Laurence F White (2011) A Legal Theory for Autonomous Artificial Agents, University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Colin Arthur Cooke (1950) Corporation, Trust, and Company: An Essay in Legal History, Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Michael Decker (2014) ‘Responsible Innovation for Adaptive Robots’ in F Battaglia, N Mukerji and J Nida-Rümelin (eds) Rethinking Responsibility in Science and Technology, Pisa University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dießelhorst (1982/1983) ‘Zur Theorie der Juristischen Person bei Carl Friedrich von Savigny’, http://www.centropgm.unifi.it/cache/quaderni/11/0320.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick William Duff (1938) Personality in Roman Private Law, Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frank H Easterbrook (1996) ‘Cyberspace and the Law of the Horse’ 1996 University of Chicago Legal Forum 207. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1996/iss1/7/.
   Google Scholar
• Stacy-Ann Elvy (2017) ‘Hybrid Transactions and the INTERNET of Things: Goods, Services, or Software’ 74 Washington and Lee Law Review 77. https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/223478936?q&versionId=245163610
   Google Scholar
• Roberto Esposito (2014) Le persone e le cose, Einaudi.
   Google Scholar
• François Ewald (1986) L’Etat Providence, Grasset.
   Google Scholar
• François Ewald (1992) ‘Responsabilité - solidarité - sécurité. La crise de la responsabilité en France à la fin du XXè siècle’ 10 Risques. Les cahiers de l’assurance 9.
   Google Scholar
• Stan Franklin and Art Graesser (1996) ‘Is It an Agent, or Just a Program?: A Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents’ in JP Müller et al (eds) Intelligent Agents III Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Paolo Greco (1954) ‘Danno cagionato da cose in custodia e presunzione di colpa’ 2 Rivista di diritto commerciale 206.
   Google Scholar
• Malte Gruber (2016) ‘Legal Responsibility of AI in Social Media and Algorithmic Trading’ in M Jankowska et al (eds) Philosophy, Geoinformatics & Law, Warschau.
   Google Scholar
• Ron Harris (2006) ‘The Transplantation of the Legal Discourse on Corporate Personality Theories: From German Codification to British Political Pluralism and American Big Business’ 63 Washington and Lee Law Review 1421.
   Google Scholar
• Herbert LA Hart and Tony Honoré (1959) Causation in the Law, Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willem FG Haselager (2005) Robotics, Philosophy and the Problems of Autonomy, Pragmatics & Cognition.
   Google Scholar
• Anna Henkel and Niels A Andersen (2016) Precarious Responsibility: Attribution of Responsibility Under Conditions of Trust in Systems, DeGruyter Oldenbourg.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas Hobbes (1651/1998) Leviathan, Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• William S Holdsworth (1922) ‘English Corporation Law in the 16th and 17th Centuries’ 31 The Yale Law Journal 382. doi: 10.2307/787883
   Google Scholar
• Geraint Howells et al (2017) ‘Product Liability and Digital Products’ in TE Synodinou et al (eds) EU Internet Law, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fleming James (1948) ‘Accident Liability Reconsidered: The Impact of Liability Insurance’ 57 The Yale Law Journal 549. doi: 10.2307/793116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael C Jensen and William H Meckling (1976) ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure’ 3 Journal of Financial Economics 305. doi: 10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• David Johnston (1999) Roman Law in Context, Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Louis Josserand (1897) De la responsabilité du fait des choses inanimées, A. Rousseau.
   Google Scholar
• Daniel Jutras (1993) ‘Louis and the Mechanical Beast or Josserand’s Contribution to Objective Liability in France’ in K Cooper–Stephenson and E Gibson (eds) Tort Law, Captus University Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Ernst Kantorowicz (1957) The King’s Two Bodies. A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology, Princeton.
   Google Scholar
• Sunghyo Kim (2018) ‘Crashed Software: Assessing Product Liability for Software Defects in Automated Vehicles’ 16 Duke Law & Technology Review 300.
   Google Scholar
• Will Knight (2018) ‘What Uber’s Fatal Accident Could Mean for the Autonomous-Car Industry’ MIT Technology Review, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610574/what-ubers-fatal-accident-could-mean-for-the-autonomous-car-industry/.
   Google Scholar
• Maximilian Koessler (1949) ‘The Person in Imagination or Persona Ficta of the Corporation’ 9 Louisiana Law Review 2.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas Kuhn (1962/1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart Kyd (1793) A Treatise on the Law of Corporations, Volume 1, J. Butterworth.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno Latour (1993) We Have Never Been Modern, Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno Latour (1994) ‘Where are the Missing Masses. The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts’ in WE Bijker and J Law (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (Inside Technology), MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno Latour (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno Latour (2007) Disinventare la modernità. Conversazioni con François Ewald, Elèuthera.
   Google Scholar
• Christophe Leroux et al (2012) Suggestions for a green paper on legal issues in robotics. Contribution to Deliverable D3.2.1 on ELS Issues in Robotics, http://www.eu-robotics.net/cms/upload/PDF/euRobotics_Deliverable_D.3.2.1_Annex_Suggestion_GreenPaper_ELS _IssuesInRobotics.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence Lessig (1999) ‘The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach’ 113 Harvard Law Review 501. doi: 10.2307/1342331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niklas Luhmann (2005) Risk: A Sociological Thoery (Communication and Social Order), Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arthur Machen (1911) ‘Corporate Personality’ 24 Harvard Law Review 253. doi: 10.2307/1324056
   Google Scholar
• Piotr Machnikowski (2016) European Product Liability: An Analysis of the State of the Art in the Era of New Technologies, Intersentia.
   Google Scholar
• Pattie Maes (ed) (1990) Designing Autonomous Agents: Theory and Practice from Biology to Engineering and Back, MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ugo Mattei (2000) Basic Principles of Property Law. A Comparative Legal and Economic Introduction, Greenwood Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Ugo Mattei (2015) La proprietà, in Trattato diretto da Sacco, Utet.
   Google Scholar
• Ugo Mattei and Alessandra Quarta (2018) Punto di svolta. Ecologia, tecnologia e diritto private. Dal capitale ai beni comuni, Aboca [English Version: (2018) The Turning Point in Private Law. Ecology, Technology and the Commons, Edward Elgar Publishing].
   Google Scholar
• Andreas Matthias (2004) ‘The Responsibility Gap: Ascribing Responsibility for the Actions of Learning Automata’ 6 Ethics and Information Technology 175. doi: 10.1007/s10676-004-3422-1
   Google Scholar
• David McFarland and Thomas Bösser (1993) Intelligent Behavior in Animals and Robots, MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pier Giuseppe Monateri et al (2016) Causazione e giustificazione del danno, Giappichelli.
   Google Scholar
• George Mousourakis (2012) Fundamentals of Roman Private Law, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Riccardo Orestano (1968) Il problema delle persone giuridiche in diritto romano, Giappichelli.
   Google Scholar
• Riccardo Orestano (1971) ‘Teoria e storia dei diritti soggettivi’ in S Rodotà (ed) Diritto privato e società moderna, Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Riccardo Orestano (1978) ‘Diritti soggettivi e diritti senza soggetto’ in R Orestano (ed) Azione, diritti soggettivi, persone giuridiche, Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Riccardo Orestano (1987) Introduzione allo studio del diritto romano, Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Ugo Pagallo (2013) The Laws of Robots: Crimes, Contracts, and Torts, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasz Pietrzykowski and Visa AJ Kurki (eds) (2017) Legal Personhood – Animals, Artificial Intelligence and the Unborn, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Frederick Pollock (1911) ‘Has the Common Law Received the Fiction Theory of Corporations’ 27 Law Quarterly Review 219.
   Google Scholar
• Georges Ripert (1948) Le Régime démocratique et le droit civil moderne, Lgdj.
   Google Scholar
• Georges Ripert (1949) La règle morale dans les obligations civiles, Lgdj.
   Google Scholar
• Stefano Rodotà (1964) Il problema della responsabilità civile, Giuffrè.
   Google Scholar
• Stefano Rodotà (1984) ‘Modelli e funzioni della responsabilità civile’ 2 Rivista critica di diritto privato 595.
   Google Scholar
• David Runciman (1997) Pluralism and the Personality of the State, Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig (2010) Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• René Savatier (1931) Vers la socialisation de la responsabilité et des risques individuels, Dalloz Hebdomadaire Chronique.
   Google Scholar
• Friedrich Carl von Savigny (1840) System des heutigen römischen Rechts - Bd. 2, Veit.
   Google Scholar
• Arthur Schiller (1978) Roman Law: Mechanisms of Development, Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• David M Schultz (1991) ‘Market Share Liability in DES Cases: The Unwarranted Erosion of Causation in Fact’ 40 DePaul Law Review 771.
   Google Scholar
• Klaus Schwab (2016) The Fourth Industrial Revolution, World Economic Forum.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence B Solum (1992) ‘Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligences’ 70 North Carolina Law Review 1231.
   Google Scholar
• Alessandro Somma (2014) Introduzione al diritto comparato, Laterza.
   Google Scholar
• Joseph H Sommer (2000) ‘Against Cyberlaw’ 15 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1145.
   Google Scholar
• Christopher D Stone (1972) ‘Should Trees Have Standing?-Toward Legal Right for Natural Objects’ 45 Southern California Law Review 450.
   Google Scholar
• Herman T Tavani (2012) Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing, Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gunther Teubner (1994) ‘The Invisible Cupola: From Causal to Collective Attribution in Ecological Liability’ in G Teubner, L Farmer and D Murphy (eds) Environmental Law and Ecological Responsibility: The Concept and Practice of Ecological Self- Organization, Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gunther Teubner (2006) ‘Rights of Non-Humans? Electronic Agents and Animals as New Actors in Politics and Law’ 33 Journal of Law and Society 497. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6478.2006.00368.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan Thomas (1998) ‘Le sujet de droit, la personne et la nature’ 100 Le débat 98. doi: 10.3917/deba.100.0085
   Google Scholar
• Yan Thomas (2016) Fictio legis. La finzione romana e i suoi limiti medievali [Italian version] in M Spanò (ed) Quodlibet.
   Google Scholar
• Pietro Trimarchi (1961/2017) Rischio e responsabilità oggettiva, Giuffrè.
   Google Scholar
• Giuseppe Tucci (1974) ‘Responsabilità civile e danni ingiusti’ in N Lipari (ed) Diritto Privato. Una ricerca per l’insegnamento, Laterza.
   Google Scholar
• Spyros G Tzafestas (2016) Roboethics. A Navigating Overview, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Peter-Paul Verbeek (2005) What Things Do – Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design, Penn State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peter Paul Verbeek (2011) Moralizing Technology. Understanding and Designing the Morality of Things, The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• John F Weaver (2013) Robots Are People Too: How Siri, Google Car, and Artificial Intelligence Will Force Us to Change Our Laws, Praeger Pub Text.
   Google Scholar
• Max Weber (1922/1949) The Methodology of the Social Sciences, The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lori A Weber (2012) ‘Bad Bytes: The Application of Strict Products Liability to Computer Software’ 66 St. John's Law Review, Article 7, https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol66/iss2/7/.
   Google Scholar
• John E Woodard (2009) ‘Oops, My GPS Made Me Do It: GPS Manufacturer Liability Under a Strict Products Liability Paradigm When GPS Fails to Give Accurate Directions to GPS End-Users’ 34 University of Dayton Law Review 429.
   Google Scholar
• Michael Wooldridge (2009) An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar