Abstract
An urgent problem of transforming Russian legal system at the present stage of its development is to find an optimal balance in determining fundamental approaches to the legal regulation of public relations complicated by cyberphysical systems, artificial intelligence, various types of robots and robotics objects, as well as to consider the possibility of giving legal personality to weak and strong artificial intelligence in various branches of law and legislation. Purpose: analysis of the issues related to determining the legal status of artificial intellectual systems, taking into account modern requirements dictated by scientific and technological progress, the development of social relations, and the rule-of-law principles, aimed at ensuring respect for the individual rights and legitimate interests, society and the state Methods: on the basis of dialectical and metaphysical methods, general scientific (analysis, synthesis, comparative law, etc.), and specific scientific (legal-dogmatic, cybernetic, interpretation) methods of scientific knowledge are used. Results: at the present stage of technological development, we should talk about the existence of a weak narrow-purpose AI (Narrow AI) and a strong General-purpose AI (General AI). Super-strong intelligence (Super AI) does not yet exist, although its development is predicted in the future. Narrow AI, of course, can not reach natural intelligence, so, based on its internal properties, it can not be considered a subject in relations under any circumstances. In contrast to narrow AI (Narrow AI), General AI (GAI) has a developed intelligence comparable to that of a human in certain characteristics. The theoretical discussion of giving an artificial intelligence the status of a subject or a “quasi” subject of law makes sense only for technological solutions in the rank of General AI and Super AI. In the case of an AIS, it can only be a question of partial legal capacity. Partial legal capacity is a status that applies to subjects that have legal capacity only in accordance with specific legal norms, but are otherwise not obligated or entitled. Therefore, when choosing the concept of legislative assignment of partial legal capacity to the AIS, it is necessary to determine which specific rights or “right obligations” will be granted to General AI and Super AI.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
