|
|
|
| Scenario-based Classification and Attribution of Tort Liability of Generative Artificial Intelligence Service Providers |
| LIANG Yuan-gao |
| Law School, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518060 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The development and application of generative artificial intelligence, which presents powerful human-like technology, has led to artificial intelligence risks, the biggest of which is the risk of infringement. The tort of generative artificial intelligence has a particularity, the tort subject has diversity, the imputation principle has diversity, and the legal liability has dispersion. Generative AI does not qualify as a legal subject, and its service provider should bear the liability for infringement. The tort liability of generative AI service providers should be divided into training stage, generation stage and removal stage, and different liability principles should be applied according to the degree of risk. The identification and commitment of tort liability of generative artificial intelligence should be changed from the approach of liability form to the analysis paradigm of infringement scenario. Product-component generative AI applies product liability to its producers, service providers are treated according to fault liability, and punitive damages should be introduced to high-risk generative AI products. The generative AI of auxiliary decision-making should compare the fault allocation of tort liability between the user and the service provider, and assign the exemption of liability. The tort of generative artificial intelligence and large model involves the liability of service provider, platform publisher, etc., and the level and size of liability should be distinguished to achieve a balance between risk and liability.
|
|
Received: 10 August 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 丁文杰. 通用人工智能视野下著作权法的逻辑回归——从“工具论”到“贡献论”[J].东方法学,2023,(5):94-105.
[2] 李扬,李晓宇.康德哲学视点下人工智能生成物的著作权问题探讨[J].法学杂志,2018,(9):43-54.
[3] 胡平仁. 法律主体新论[J].甘肃社会科学,2023,(6):111-127.
[4] 邓晓芒. 人工智能的本质[J].山东社会科学,2022,(12):39-46.
[5] 袁曾. 人工智能有限法律人格审视[J].东方法学,2017,(5):50-57.
[6] 王春梅,冯源.技术性人格:人工智能主体资格的私法构设[J].华东政法大学学报,2021,(5):69-80.
[7] 刘蕊.叫板黄仁勋?Meta首席AI科学家:超级人工智能不会很快到来[EB/OL].https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=17 84309031339521530&wfr=spider&for=pc,2024-07-30.
[8] 王迁. 三论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定位[J].法商研究,2024,(3):182-200.
[9] 徐伟. 论生成式人工智能服务提供者的法律地位及其责任——以ChatGPT为例[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2023,(4):69-80.
[10] 杨显滨. 生成式人工智能服务提供者间接侵权责任的承担与限制[J].法学家,2024,(3):46-60.
[11] 高阳. 通用人工智能提供者内容审查注意义务的证成[J].东方法学,2024,(1):189-200.
[12] 郑志峰. 人工智能应用责任的主体识别与归责设计[J].法学评论,2024,(4):123-137.
[13] 邢会强. 场景理论在《个人信息保护法》解释中的应用[J].数字法治,2024,(2):73-90.
[14] Helen Nissenbaum.Privacy in Context:Technology,Policy,and the Integrity of Social Life[M].California:Stanford University Press,2010.140.
[15] (美)戴维·G·欧文.侵权法的哲学基础[M].张金海,谢九华,刘金瑞等译.北京:北京大学出版社,2016.321.
[16] 朱振. 归责何以可能:人工智能时代的自由意志与法律责任[J].比较法研究,2022,(1):39-54.
[17] 徐伟. 生成式人工智能服务提供者侵权归责原则之辨[J].法制与社会发展,2024,(3):190-204.
[18] Ariat Lior.AI Strict Liability Vis-à-vis AI Monopoli-zation[J].Columbia Science and Technology Law Review,2020,(22):90-112.
[19] 黄茂荣. 侵权责任法规范规划上之重要问题初探[J].苏州大学学报(法学版),2018,(2):1-18.
[20] 徐伟. 通知移除制度的重新定性及其体系效应[J].现代法学,2013,(1):58-70.
[21] 周学峰. 生成式人工智能侵权责任探析[J].比较法研究,2023,(4):117-131.
[22] 张安毅. 人工智能侵权:产品责任制度介入权宜性及立法改造[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2020,37(4):112-119.
[23] 丁晓东. 全球比较下的我国人工智能立法[J].比较法研究,2024,(4):51-66.
[24] 付其运. 人工智能非主体性前提下侵权责任承担机制研究[J].法学杂志,2021,(4):83-90.
[25] (德)汉斯·伦克.人与社会的责任:负责的社会哲学[M].陈巍,励洁丹等译.杭州:浙江大学出版社,2020.18.
[26] 何丽. 人工智能辅助医疗决策的归责难题新解[J].自然辩证法研究,2023,(6):65-71.
[27] 张继红. 生成式人工智能生成内容标识义务研究[J].法商研究,2024,(4):187-200.
[28] 王利明. 生成式人工智能侵权的法律应对[J].中国应用法学,2023,(5):27-38.
[29] 田思路. 技术从属性下雇主的算法权力与法律规制[J].法学研究,2022,(6):132-150.
[30] PH Padovan,CM Martins,C Reed.Black Is the New Orange: How to Determine AI Liability[J].Artificial Inte-lligence and Law,2023,(31):133-167.
[31] 王若冰. 论生成式人工智能侵权中服务提供者过错的认定——以“现有技术水平”为标准[J].比较法研究,2023,(5):20-33. |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 41 
