Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Killers, fridges, and slaves: a legal journey in robotics

  • Original Article
  • Published:
AI & SOCIETY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper adopts a legal perspective to counter some exaggerations of today’s debate on the social understanding of robotics. According to a long and well-established tradition, there is in fact a relative strong consensus among lawyers about some key notions as, say, agency and liability in the current use of robots. However, dealing with a field in rapid evolution, we need to rethink some basic tenets of the contemporary legal framework. In particular, time has come for lawyers to acknowledge that some acts of robots should be considered as a new source of legal responsibility for others’ behaviour.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abernathy CF (2006) Law in the United States. Thomson West, St. Paul

    Google Scholar 

  • Aleksander I, Dunmall B (2003) Axioms and tests for the presence of minimal consciousness in agents. In: Holland O (ed) Machine consciousness. Imprint Academic, Exeter, pp 8–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen C, Varner G, Zinser J (2000) Prolegomena to any future artificial moral agent. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 12:251–261

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Asaro P (2007) Robots and responsibility from a legal perspective. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on robotics and automation: workshop on roboethics. Rome, 14 April 2007

  • Asimov I (1942) Runaround. Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Asimov I (1985) Robots and empire. Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrio F (2008) Autonomous robots and the law. Society for computers and law. Retrieved August 15th, 2009, from http://www.scl.org/site.aspx?i=ho0

  • Bekey GA (2005) Autonomous robots: from biological inspiration to implementation and control. The Mit Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bynum TW (2006) Flourishing ethics. Ethics Inf Technol 8:157–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke R (1993) Asimov’s laws of robotics: implications for information technology. IEEE computer 26(12):53–61 and (1994) 27(1):57–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Comanducci P (2006) Le tre leggi della robotica e l’insegnamento della filosofia del diritto. Materiali per una storia della cultura giuridica XXXVI 1:191–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett D (1997) When HAL kills, who’s to blame? In: Stork D (ed) HAL’s legacy: 2001’s computer as dream and reality. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 351–365

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein RG (1997) The case of the killer robot. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewald W (1995) Comparative jurisprudence (I): what was it like to try a rat. Am J Comp Law 143:1889–2149

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L (2007) Artificial companions and their philosophical challenges. E-mentor 5(22):84–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L, Sanders JW (2005) On the morality of artificial agents. Mind Mach 14(3):349–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin S (2003) IDA: a conscious artifact? In: Holland O (ed) Machine consciousness. Imprint Academic, Exeter, pp 47–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart H (1961) The concept of law. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Karnow CEA (1996) Liability for distributed artificial intelligence. Berkeley Technol Law J 11:147–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz A (2008) Intelligent agents and internet commerce in ancient Rome. Society for computers and law. Retrieved August 15th, 2009, from http://www.scl.org/site.aspx?i=ho0

  • McFarland D (2008) Guilty robots, happy dogs: the question of alien minds. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravec H (1999) Robot: mere machine to transcendent mind. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagallo U (2009) Sul principio di responsabilità giuridica in rete. Il diritto dell’informazione e dell’informatica XXV(4–5):705–734

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagallo U (2010) The human master with a modern slave? Some remarks on robotics, ethics, and the law. In: Arias-Oliva M, Bynum TW, Rogerson S, Torres-Corona T (eds) Ethicomp 2010: the “backwards, forwards and sideways” changes of ICT. Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, pp 397–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds C, Ishikawa M (2007) Robotic thugs. In: Bynum TW, Rogerson S, Murata K (eds) Ethicomp 2007: glocalisation. Global e-SCM Research Center & Meiji University, Tokyo, pp 487–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Solum LB (1992) Legal personhood for artificial intelligence. North Carolina law rev 70:1231–1287

    Google Scholar 

  • Ŝtaerman EM, Trofimova MK (1975) La schiavitù nell’Italia imperiale. I-III secolo. Editori Riuniti, Roma

    Google Scholar 

  • Teubner G (2007) Rights of non-humans? Electronic agents and animals as new actors in politics and law. Max Weber Lecture at the European University Institute of Fiesole, Italy on 17th January 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Veruggio G (2007) Euron roboethics roadmap. In: Proceedings Euron roboethics atelier. February 27th-March 3rd, 2006, Genoa, Italy

  • Watson A (1988) The digest of Justinian, vol I. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann R (1988) The law of obligations. Roman foundations of the civilian tradition. Clarendon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Law School, University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Ugo Pagallo

Authors
  1. Ugo Pagallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ugo Pagallo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pagallo, U. Killers, fridges, and slaves: a legal journey in robotics. AI & Soc 26, 347–354 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-010-0316-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-010-0316-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation