Use and citation of paper "Fox et al (2018), “When should the chicken cross the road? Game theory for autonomous vehicle - human interactions conference paper”" by the Law Commission to review and potentially change the law of the UK on autonomous vehicles. Cited in their consultation report, "Automated Vehicles: A joint preliminary consultation paper" on p174, ref 651.

Topic of this consultation: The Centre for Connected and Automated Vehicles (CCAV) has asked the Law Commission of England and Wales and the Scottish Law Commission to examine options for regulating automated road vehicles. It is a three-year project, running from March 2018 to March 2021. This preliminary consultation paper focuses on the safety of passenger vehicles. Driving automation refers to a broad range of vehicle technologies. Examples range from widely-used technologies that assist human drivers (such as cruise control) to vehicles that drive themselves with no human intervention. We concentrate on automated driving systems which do not need human drivers for at least part of the journey. This paper looks at are three key themes. First, we consider how safety can be assured before and after automated driving systems are deployed. Secondly, we explore criminal and civil liability. Finally, we examine the need to adapt road rules for artificial intelligence

Autonomous Weapons and Human Responsibilities

Although remote-controlled robots flying over the Middle East and Central Asia now dominate reports on new military technologies, robots that are capable of detecting, identifying, and killing enemies on their own are quietly but steadily movingfrom the theoretical to the practical. The enormous difficulty in assigning responsibilities to humans and states for the actions ofthese machines grows with their increasing autonomy. These developments implicate serious legal, ethical, and societal concerns. This Article focuses on the accountability of states and underlying human responsibilities for autonomous weapons under International Humanitarian Law or the Law of Armed Conflict. After reviewing the evolution of autonomous weapon systems and diminishing human involvement in these systems along a continuum of autonomy, this Article argues that the elusive search for individual culpability for the actions of autonomous weapons foreshadows fundamental problems in assigning responsibility to states for the actions of these machines. It further argues that the central legal requirement relevant to determining accountability (especially for violation of the most important international legal obligations protecting the civilian population in armed conflicts) is human judgment. Access to effective human judgment already appears to be emerging as the deciding factor in establishing practical restrictions and framing legal concerns with respect to the deployment of the most advanced autonomous weapons

Proceed with Caution : Artificial Intelligence in Weapon Systems

Publisher PD

Criminal liability of autonomous agents: from the unthinkable to the plausible

Series : Lecture notes in computer science, ISSN 0302-9743, vol. 8929The evolution of information technologies have brought us to a point where we are confronted with the existence of agents - computational entities - which are able to act autonomously with little or no human intervention. And their behavior can damage individual or collective interests that are protected by criminal law. Based on the analysis of different models of criminal responsibility of legal persons - which constituted an interesting advance in the criminal law in rela-tion to what was hitherto traditionally accepted -, we will appraise whether the necessary legal elements to have direct criminal liability of artificial entities are present.This work is part-funded by CROWDSOURCING project (Reference: DER2012-39492-C02-01)

Autonomous Lethality: Regime type, international law, and lethal autonomy in weapons

Competition for military power and national security has long relied on technological prowess. Autonomous weapons systems are often seen as the next ‘logical’ step in modern weapons development. The use of lethal automated systems – with some autonomous decision-making – is already a reality. These autonomous weapons face opposition from civil society. There is widespread concern that they will bring about inhumane and unethical forms of combat conducted by robots with no accountability. The Law of Armed Conflict provides a framework for ethical conduct in conflict. However, these laws were written to apply to human entities. Its key concepts, such as the discrimination of target type, may not easily transfer to autonomous, non-human systems. Additionally, states may not abide by these laws when developing autonomous weapons. Accountability gaps and differences in legal interpretation give rise to the question of whether autonomous weapons can be used without consequence under international law. This project analyses past state behaviour to provide insight into states willingness to abide by the Law of Armed Conflict when developing autonomous weapons. I study two states with different regime types: The United States of America (democratic) and Russia (authoritarian). I find that international law has a different impact in these different political environments. Both realist and institutionalist perspectives on regime type find some support in the impact of international law on autonomous weapons. A state’s self interest in bending or disregarding international law to obtain military capabilities are well documented. However, the existence of democratic processes and laws suggests that international institutions can shape some state behaviour, at least in democracies. There may also be situations where it is advantageous to abide by international law. That I find past instances of both democratic and authoritarian regimes disregarding international law suggests that, for future development of autonomous weapons, we can expect these states to overlook international law again, despite their different regime types

Digitization and the Law

Neue Technologien bedeuten neue Herausforderungen für das Recht. Das Internet ist kein Neuland mehr, kritische Themen wie Cyberattacken, Privatsphäre, der Schutz Minderjähriger oder auch das Cloud Computing sind jedoch keinesfalls ausdiskutiert. Die zunehmende Digitalisierung und Technisierung beschränkt sich nicht auf das World Wide Web. Der automatisierte Straßenverkehr ist ein ebenso zukunftsweisendes Thema, dessen Entwicklung rechtlich begleitet werden muss. Im vorliegenden Band sind Forschungsarbeiten von Rechtwissenschaftlern aus Deutschland, den USA, Kanada und Griechenland zusammengefasst

Digitization and the Law

Neue Technologien bedeuten neue Herausforderungen für das Recht. Das Internet ist kein Neuland mehr, kritische Themen wie Cyberattacken, Privatsphäre, der Schutz Minderjähriger oder auch das Cloud Computing sind jedoch keinesfalls ausdiskutiert. Die zunehmende Digitalisierung und Technisierung beschränkt sich nicht auf das World Wide Web. Der automatisierte Straßenverkehr ist ein ebenso zukunftsweisendes Thema, dessen Entwicklung rechtlich begleitet werden muss. Im vorliegenden Band sind Forschungsarbeiten von Rechtwissenschaftlern aus Deutschland, den USA, Kanada und Griechenland zusammengefasst