Abstract
Legal codes, such as the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) examined in this article, are good points of entry for AI and ontology work because of their more straightforward adaptability to relationship linking and rules-based encoding. However, approaches relying on encoding solely on formal code structure are incomplete, missing the rich experience of practitioner expertise that identifies key relationships and decision criteria often supplied by experienced practitioners and process experts from various disciplines (e.g., sociology, political economics, logistics, operations research). This research focuses on the UCC because it transcends the limitations of a formal code, functioning essentially as a composite. AI work can benefit from real-world codes like the UCC, which are essentially formal codes enlightened from a more realistic experience-base from centuries of development in international commercial transactions settings. This paper then describes our initial work in converting an expert system on the U.S. law governing the sale of goods from Article II of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), into a knowledge-based system using the Web Ontology Language OWL.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aikenhead, M. (1996). The uses and abuses of neural networks in Law 12, Santa Clara High Tech Law Journal.
Aoki, C., Kurematsu, M., and Yamaguchi, T. (1998). LODE: A Legal Ontology Development Environment.
Bagby, J. (1987). Artificial Intelligence in Sales Law: A Decision Analysis Approach to Commercial Transactions, Center for Research, College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University 87–1.
Bagby, J. (2002). e-Commerce Law: Issues for Business.
Baker, B. (1994). Beyond Maccrate: The Role of Context, Experience, Theory and Reflection in Ecological Learning, 36 Arizona Law Review 287.
Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., and Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web, in Scientific American.
Biagioli, C. and Turchi, F. (2005). Model and ontology based conceptual searching in legislative XML collections, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Blackwel, T. F. (1999/2000). Finally Adding Method to Madness: N1 Applying Principles of Object-Oriented Analysis And Design To Legislative Drafting, 3 N.Y.U. J. Legis. & Pub Pol’y 227.
Boella, G. and van der Torre, L. (2005). The Ontologicial Properties of Social Roles: Definitional Dependence, Powers and Roles Playing Roles, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Boer, A., van Engers, T., and Winkels, R. (2005). Normative Statements on the Semantic Web, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Breuker, J. (2004). Constructing a legal core ontology, presented at Workshop on Ontologies and their applications.
Casanovas, P., Casellas, N., Tempich, C., Vrandecic, D., and Benjamins, R. (2005). OPJK modeling methodology, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Debnath, S., Sen, S., and Blackstock, B. (2000). LawBot: A Multiagent Assistant for Legal Research, IEEE Internet Computing 4: 32–37.
Despres, S. and Szulman, S. (2005). Merging of Legal Micro-ontologies from European Directives, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Eriksson, H. (2003). Using JessTab to Integrate Protege and Jess, IEEE Intelligent Systems Journal 43–50.
Gil, R., Garcia, R., and Delgado, J. (2005). An interoperable framework for intellectual property rights using web ontologies, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Gray, P. N. (2005). Ontology and Epistemology in Legal Knowledge Engineering, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Groothuis, M. M. (2002). Expert Systems in the Field of General Assistance: An Investigation into Juridical Quality, 52 Syracuse Law Review 1269.
Grosof, B. and Poon, T. (2003). SweetDeal: Representing Agent Contracts with Exceptions using XML Rules, Ontologies, and Process Descriptions, Presented at WWW 2003, Budapest, Hungary.
Hafner, C. D. (1987). Conceptual organization of case law knowledge bases, Presented at 1st International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL), Boston, Massachusetts.
Hassett, P. (2000). Essay: Technology Time Capsule: What does the future hold? 50 Syracuse Law Review 1223.
Hoekstra, R. and Breuker, J. (2005). Processes as Causal Glue in a Framework for Ontology-Based Responsbility Attribution, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Kabilan, V. and Johannesson, P. (2003). Semantic Representation of Contract Knowledge using Multi-tier Ontology, Presented at The first International Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (SWDB’03), Berlin, Germany.
Lachmayer, F. and Hoffman, H. (2005). From Legal Categories toward Legal Ontologies, ICAIL workshop on legal ontologies and artificial intelligence techniques (LOAIT).
Lamkin, B. H. (1994). Comments: Medical Expert Systems and Publisher Liability: A Cross-Contextual Analysis. 43 Emory Law Journal 731.
Levitt, T. S. and Laskey, K. B. (2001). Symposium: From Theory To Practice: “Intelligent” Procedures For Drawing Inferences In Static And Dynamic Legal Environments: Computational Inference For Evidential Reasoning In Support of Judicial Proof, 22 Cardozo Law Review 1691.
Noy, N. F., Sintek, M., Decker, S., Crubezy, M., Fergerson, R. W., and Musen M. A. (2001). Creating Semantic Web Contents with Protégé-2000, IEEE Intelligence Systems 60–71.
Peters, W., Tiscornia, D., and Sagri, M.-T. (2005). The structuring of legal knowledge in LOIS, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Posner, R. A. (1998). The Jurisprudence of Skepticism,” 86 Michigan Law Review 827.
Rissland, E. L. (1990). Comment: Artificial Intelligence and Law: Stepping Stones to a Model of Legal Reasoning, 99 Yale Law Journal 1957.
Royakkers, L., Grossi, D., and Dignum, F. (2005). Responsibilities in Organizations, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT), Bologna, Italy.
Schweighofer, E. and Liebwald, D. (2005). Advanced Lexical Ontologies and Hybrid Knowledge based systems: first steps to a dynamic legal electronic commentary, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Shaheed, J., Yip, A., and Cunningham, J. (2005). A top-level language-biased legal ontology, Presented at ICAIL Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bagby, J., Mullen, T. Legal ontology of sales law application to ecommerce. Artif Intell Law 15, 155–170 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9027-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9027-3