Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Laws and Regulation of AI and Autonomous Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Unimagined Futures – ICT Opportunities and Challenges

Part of the book series: IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology ((Festschrifts,volume 555))

Abstract

Our regulatory systems have attempted to keep abreast of new technologies by recalibrating and adapting our regulatory frameworks to provide for new opportunities and risks, to confer rights and duties, safety and liability frameworks, and to ensure legal certainty for businesses. These adaptations have been reactive and sometimes piecemeal, often with artificial delineation on rights and responsibilities and with unintended flow-on consequences. Previously, technologies have been deployed more like tools, but as autonomy and self-learning capabilities increase, robots and intelligent AI systems will feel less and less like machines and tools. There is now a significant difference, because machine learning AI systems have the ability to learn, adapt their performances and ‘make decisions’ from data and ‘life experiences’. This chapter provides brief insights on some of the topical developments in our regulatory systems and the current debates on some of the risks and challenges from the use and actions of AI, autonomous and intelligent systems [1].

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. This chapter is for general reference purposes only. It does not constitute legal or professional advice. It is general comment only. Before making any decision or taking any action you should consult your legal or professional advisers to ascertain how the regulatory system applies to your particular circumstances in your jurisdiction

    Google Scholar 

  2. Australian AI Ethics Framework (2019). https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/building-australias-artificial-intelligence-capability/ai-ethics-framework. Accessed 6 June 2020

  3. European Commission: Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI (2019). https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai. Accessed 6 June 2020

  4. OECD: OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence, 22 May 2019. https://www.oecd.org/going-digital/ai/principles/. Accessed 20 June 2020

  5. World Economic Forum: AI Governance: A Holistic Approach to Implement Ethics into AI. https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/ai-governance-a-holistic-approach-to-implement-ethics-into-ai. Accessed 20 June 2020

  6. Singapore Model AI Governance Framework. https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/files/pdpc/pdf-files/resource-for-organisation/ai/sgmodelaigovframework2.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2020

  7. Definition from the Australian Securities & Investments Commission: Regulatory Guide 255 - Providing Digital Financial Product Advice to Retail Client. https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/regulatory-guides/rg-255-providing-digital-financial-product-advice-to-retail-clients/. Accessed 6 June 2020

  8. Corporations Amendment (Professional Standards of Financial Advisers) Act 2017

    Google Scholar 

  9. Australian Securities & Investments Commission: Regulatory Guide 255 - Providing Digital Financial Product Advice to Retail Client. https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/regulatory-guides/rg-255-providing-digital-financial-product-advice-to-retail-clients/. Accessed 6 June 2020

  10. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), 2016 O.J. (L 119/1) [GDPR]

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid art. 15(1)(h)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ibid art. 22(3)

    Google Scholar 

  13. This section is based on the article, Wong, A.: Do robots and artificial intelligence think about copyright? The Australian, 5 September 2017

    Google Scholar 

  14. UK Intellectual Property Office, refer patent decision BL O/741/19 of December 2019. https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-challenge-decision-results/p-challenge-decision-results-bl?BL_Number=O/741/19. Accessed 10 July 2020

  15. European Patent Office, refer decision of January 2020. https://www.epo.org/news-issues/news/2020/20200128.html. Accessed 10 July 2020

  16. US Patent and Trademark Office, refer to decision of April 2020 on Application No. 16/524,350. https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/16524350_22apr2020.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2020

  17. Here the computer is used as a tool equivalent of the painter’s brush or the writer’s pen by the author in the creation of the work

    Google Scholar 

  18. Similar provisions have been replicated in New Zealand, Ireland, India, Hong Kong and South Africa

    Google Scholar 

  19. Copyright Designs and Patents Act 2988 (UK) s 9(3)

    Google Scholar 

  20. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), Conversation of Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence, Revised Issues paper on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence, May 2020, paragraph 23. https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=499504. Accessed 20 July 2020

  21. In recognition of the importance of the ‘Digital Economy’, the US President Obama requested a study to examine how the US can benefit from the data economy in January 2014. The report Big Data: Seizing Opportunities, Preserving Values concluded that data can be a driver for economic growth and innovation (‘Big Data: Seizing Opportunities, Preserving Values’)

    Google Scholar 

  22. For an overview on data ownership, refer to Wong, A.: Big data fuels digital disruption and innovation, but who owns data? In: Chaikin, D., Coshott, D. (eds.) Digital Disruption Impact of Business Models, Regulation & Financial Crime (ch. 2). Australian Scholarly Publishing, Australia (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Beverley-Smith, H.: The Commercial Appropriation of Personality, p. 296. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Merges, R.P.: Justifying Intellectual Property, p. 100. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nimmer, R.T.: Information Law [2:8]. Thomson Reuters, May 2014

    Google Scholar 

  26. The nature of the copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work is defined in copyright legislation in the respective jurisdictions and in Australia, under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) s 31

    Google Scholar 

  27. Samuelson, P.: Is information property? Commun. ACM 34(3), 16 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  28. For an introduction to the protection of information using the law of confidential information, see Lahore, LexisNexis: Patents, Trade Marks & Related Rights (at 25 April 2016) [30,000]

    Google Scholar 

  29. See, eg, Federal Commissioner of Taxation v United Aircraft Corp (1943) 68 CLR 525 at 534; Moorgate Tobacco Co Ltd v Philip Morris Ltd. (No. 2) (1984) 156 CLR 414 at 438; Breen v Williams (1996) 186 CLR 71 at 81, 90, 111, 125; and Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd. (2001) 208 CLR 199 at 271

    Google Scholar 

  30. See Osenga, K.: Information may want to be free, but information products do not: protecting and facilitating transactions in information products. Cardozo Law Rev. 30(5), 2099, 2101 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, OJ L 077, 27/03/1996

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ibid art 7

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ibid art 3

    Google Scholar 

  34. Treasury Laws Amendment (Consumer Data Right) Act 2019. https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/consumer-data-right-cdr-0. Accessed 2 June 2020

  35. Regulation (EU) 2018/1807 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 on a framework for the free flow of non-personal data in the European Union, OJ L 303, 28.11.2018

    Google Scholar 

  36. Article 20 of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Smith, B.: Legal personality. Yale Law J. 37(3), 283–299 (1928)

    Google Scholar 

  38. For a discussion on the concept and expression “legal personality” refer to Bryson, J.J., Diamantis, M.E., Grant, T.D.: Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artif. Intell. Law. 25(3), 277 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  39. European Parliament: European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015/2103(INL)), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52017IP0051. Accessed 9 June 2020

  40. Ibid paragraph 59(f)

    Google Scholar 

  41. http://www.robotics-openletter.eu/. Accessed 9 June 2020

  42. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies: Statement on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and ‘Autonomous’ Systems, p. 10. European Commission, Brussels (2018). http://ec.europa.eu/research/ege/pdf/ege_ai_statement_2018.pdf. Accessed 9 June 2020

  43. European Commission: White Paper on Artificial Intelligence - A European Approach to Excellence and Trust, COM (2020), vol. 65, 19 February 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/commissionwhite-paper-artificial-intelligence-feb2020_en.pdf. Accessed 9 June 2020

  44. European Commission: Report on the safety and liability implications of Artificial Intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics, COM (2020), vol. 64, 19 February 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/commission-report-safety-and-liability-implications-ai-internet-thingsand-robotics_en. Accessed 9 June 2020

  45. Bryson, J.J., Diamantis, M.E., Grant, T.D.: Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artif. Intell. Law 25(3), 273–291 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. The World Economic Forum: White Paper on AI Governance a Holistic Approach to Implement Ethics into AI, p. 6. Geneva, Switzerland (2019). https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/ai-governance-a-holistic-approach-to-implement-ethics-into-ai. Accessed 9 June 2020

  47. Selbst, A.D.: Negligence and AI’s human users. In: Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper No. 20-01, p. 1. UCLA School of Law (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  48. For a brief rundown of the regulatory frameworks and developments in selected countries refer to the Australian National Transport Commission 2020, Review of ‘Guidelines for trials of automated vehicles in Australia’: Discussion paper, NTC, Melbourne, pp. 16–18. https://www.ntc.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/files/NTC%20Discussion%20Paper%20-%20Review%20of%20guidelines%20for%20trials%20of%20automated%20vehicles%20in%20Australia.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2020. For examples of Australian legislation refer to: Motor Vehicles (Trials of Automotive Technologies) Amendment Act 2016 (SA), Transport Legislation Amendment (Automated Vehicle Trials and Innovation) Act 2017 (NSW), Road Safety Amendment (Automated Vehicles) Act 2018 (Vic)

  49. For the new European Union drone rules refer to: https://www.easa.europa.eu/domains/civil-drones-rpas/drones-regulatory-framework-background. For the Australia drone rules refer to: https://www.casa.gov.au/knowyourdrone/drone-rules and the Civil Aviation Safety Amendment (Remotely Piloted Aircraft and Model Aircraft—Registration and Accreditation) Regulations 2019

  50. European Commission: Report on the safety and liability implications of Artificial Intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics, COM (2020), vol. 64, p. 14, 19 February 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/commission-report-safety-and-liability-implications-ai-internet-thingsand-robotics_en. Accessed June 2020

  51. Australian National Transport Commission 2020: Review of ‘Guidelines for trials of automated vehicles in Australia’: Discussion paper, NTC, Melbourne, pp. 26–27. https://www.ntc.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/files/NTC%20Discussion%20Paper%20-%20Review%20of%20guidelines%20for%20trials%20of%20automated%20vehicles%20in%20Australia.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2020

  52. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) art. 22; Recital 71; see also Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, 2018a, Guidelines on Automated individual decision-making and Profiling for the purposes of Regulation 2016/679, 17/EN WP251rev.01, p. 19. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/article29/item-detail.cfm?item_id=612053. Accessed 4 June 2020

  53. Cobbe, J.: Administrative law and the machines of government: judicial review of automated public-sector decision-making. Legal Stud. 3 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  54. For the interpretability characteristics of various AI models, refer to ICO and Alan Turing Institute: Guidance on explaining decisions made with AI (2020). annexe 2. https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/key-data-protection-themes/explaining-decisions-made-with-artificial-intelligence-1-0.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2020

  55. For the types of explanation that an organisation may provide, refer to ICO and Alan Turing Institute: Guidance on explaining decisions made with AI, p. 20 (2020). https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/key-data-protection-themes/explaining-decisions-made-with-artificial-intelligence-1-0.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2020

  56. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) art. 15

    Google Scholar 

  57. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) art. 22

    Google Scholar 

  58. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) arts. 13–14

    Google Scholar 

  59. European Commission: Report on the safety and liability implications of Artificial Intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics, COM (2020), vol. 64, , p. 15, 19 February 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/commission-report-safety-and-liability-implications-ai-internet-thingsand-robotics_en. Accessed 9 June 2020

  60. Australian Human Rights Commission: Discussion Paper on Human Rights and Technology, p. 104 (2019). https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/rights-and-freedoms/publications/human-rights-and-technology-discussion-paper-2019. Accessed 20 June 2020; For a US perspective, refer to Flicker, K.: The prison of convenience, the need for national regulation of biometric technology in sports venues. 30 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media Ent. L. J. 985, 1015 (2020). https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol30/iss3/7/. Accessed 20 June 2020

Download references

Acknowledgment

I would like to acknowledge and express my appreciation to Graeme Philipson for his editorial assistance. He is an ICT editor, writer and publisher, and author of ‘The Vision Splendid: The History of Australian Computing’. www.philipson.info

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AGW Lawyers & Consultants, Sydney, Australia

    Anthony Wong

  2. IFIP, Laxenburg, Austria

    Anthony Wong

Authors
  1. Anthony Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony Wong .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. De Nederlandsche Bank, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Leon Strous

  2. Birkbeck University of London, London, UK

    Roger Johnson

  3. Djaghe LLC, Washington, DC, USA

    David Alan Grier

  4. Kingston upon Thames, UK

    Doron Swade

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wong, A. (2020). The Laws and Regulation of AI and Autonomous Systems. In: Strous, L., Johnson, R., Grier, D.A., Swade, D. (eds) Unimagined Futures – ICT Opportunities and Challenges. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology(), vol 555. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64246-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64246-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-64245-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-64246-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation