| 司伟攀.欧盟和美国人工智能立法实践分析与镜鉴[J].全球科技经济瞭望,2023,38(7):6~14 |
| 欧盟和美国人工智能立法实践分析与镜鉴 |
| E.U.-U.S. AI Legislative Practice |
| 投稿时间：2023-04-26 |
| DOI：10.3772/j.issn.1009-8623.2023.07.002 |
| 中文关键词: 人工智能；立法；立法类型；立法模式；责任 |
| 英文关键词: AI; legislation; legislation type; legislative mode; duty |
| 基金项目:项目来源：中国科学技术信息研究所创新研究基金面上项目“人工智能数据安全风险及治理研究”（MS2023-10）。 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 423 |
| 全文下载次数: 571 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 立法是治理人工智能风险、促进人工智能可持续发展的重要举措。人工智能的法律定义界定、
立法类型与模式选择，以及法律权责认定，是人工智能立法中面临的三大问题。立足中国国情，比较和
借鉴了欧盟和美国人工智能立法研究与实践经验，中国人工智能立法应以人工智能本质和未来发展为
抓手厘定其法律定义，构建促进型立法和规范型立法兼具，综合性立法、分散式立法与附属立法相结
合的人工智能立法体系，并通过立法否认人工智能法律主体地位、设置举证责任倒置等机制合理划分
人工智能侵权责任。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Legislation is an important measure to control the risk of artificial intelligence (AI) and promote
the sustainable development of AI. The three main challenges in AI legislation are the legal definition, legislation
type and mode selection, and the determination of legal rights and responsibilities. Based on China’s national
conditions, the research and practical experience of AI legislation in the European Union and the United States
are compared. China should define its legal definition with the essence and future development of artificial
intelligence as the starting point, build an AI legislative system with both promoting normative legislation and
legislation, combine comprehensive legislation with decentralized legislation and subsidiary legislation, and
rationally divide artificial intelligence tort liability through legislation denying the legal subject status of AI and
setting up mechanisms such as inversion of burden of proof. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
