DAS RECHT UND DIE KÜNSTLICHE INTELLIGENZ: E-PERSON, HAFTUNG UND RECHTLICHES ANWENDUNGSBESPIEL

Öz

LAW AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: E-PERSON, LIABILITY, AND A LEGAL APPLICATION EXAMPLE

Öz

Nowadays artificial intelligence is used in many fields such as city planning, production, automation, medicine and security. In legal field, artificial intelligence research is making progress since 30 years. Nevertheless, many questions about the implementation are still open. The interaction between artificial intelligence and law is examined on two levels in this study. Firstly, it is discussed whether artificial intelligence systems can be a legal subject, and if so, what could be the consequences and implications. Secondly, it is discussed how law as a discipline can be supported with artificial intelligence systems. An example is put forward as to how such systems can be designed to be implemented in marital property regimes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artificial Intelligence
• E-person
• E-lawyer
• Liability
• Capacity to Have Rights and to Act
• Legal Logic

HUKUK VE YAPAY ZEKÂ: E-KİŞİ, MALİ SORUMLULUK VE BİR HUKUK UYGULAMASI

Öz

Yapay zekâ günümüzde şehircilikten üretim otomasyonuna, tıptan güvenliğe pek çok alanda uygulanmaktadır. Hukuk alanında yapay zekâ araştırmaları, Dünya’da 30 yılı aşkın bir süredir yapılmaktadır. Buna rağmen bu alandaki uygulama ile ilgili birçok soru halen açıktır. Çalışmada, yapay zekâ ile hukuk etkileşimi iki düzlemde incelenmiştir. İlk olarak yapay zekâlı sistemlerin bir hukuk öznesi olup olamayacağı, olurlarsa bunun sonuçları ve etkileri tartışılmıştır. İkinci olaraksa hukukun bir disiplin olarak yapay zekâ sistemleri tarafından nasıl desteklenebileceği tartışılmış ve yasal mal rejimi konusunda bir uygulama ile böyle bir sistemin nasıl tasarlanabileceği örneklendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapay Zekâ
• E-kişi
• E-hukukçu
• Hak ve Fiil Ehliyeti
• Sorumluluk
• Hukuk Mantığı

Kaynakça

1. ALCHOURRON C. E./BULYING E., Normative Systems, Springer Verlag, Wien-New York, 1971.
2. ALLEN L. E./SAXON C. S., “More IA Needed in AI: Interpretation Assistance for Coping with the Problem of Multiple Structural Interpretations”, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, 1991, s. 53-61.
3. ALLEN L. E., “Symbolic Logic: A razor-edged tool for drafting and interpreting legal documents”, Yale Law Journal 66, 1957, s. 833-879.
4. BENCH-CAPON T. J. M., SARTOR G., “A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values”, Artificial Intelligence 150, 2003, s. 97-142.
5. BENCH-CAPON T. J. M./ATKINSON K./CHORLEY A., “Persuasion and value in legal argument”, Journal of Logic and Computation 15, 2005, s. 1075-1097.
6. BENCH-CAPON T. J. M, vd., “A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and Law”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 20.3, 2012, s. 215-319.
7. BEX F. J./PRAKKEN H./REED C./WALTON D. N., “Toward a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalizations”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 11, 2003, s. 125-165.
8. DUNG P. M., “On the acceptability of arguments and its fundemantal role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games”, Artificial Intelligence 77, 1995, s. 321-357.

9. FARRELL A. D. H./SERGOT M. J./SALLE M./BARTOLİNİ C., “Using the event calculus for tracking the normative state of contracts”, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 4, 2005, s. 99-129.
10. FRESE Yorck, Recht im zweiten Maschinenzeitalter, NJW, 2015, s. 2090. GOVERNATORİ G./DUMAS M./TER HOFSTEDE A. H. M./OAKS P, “A formal approach to protocols and strategies for (legal) negotiation”, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, 2005, s. 25-34.
11. HAGE J. C., “Comparing alternatives in the law Legal applications of qualitative comparative reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 12, 2005, s. 181-225.
12. JONES A. J. I./SERGOT M. J., “Deontic logic in the representation of law: Towards a methodology”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 1, 1992, s. 42-64.
13. KARJOTH G., “Ist auf unsere digitalen Assistenten Verlass?“, digma - Zeitschrift für Datenrecht und Informationssicherheit, 2017, s. 122-127.
14. LINDAHL L., Position and Change, A Study in Law and Logic, Dordrecht, Reidel, 1977.
15. LOUI R. P./NORMAN J./OLSON J./MERILL A., “A design for reasoning with policies, precedents, and rationales”, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, 1993, s. 202-211.
16. LOUI R. P./NORMAN J., “Rationales as argument moves”, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1995, s. 159-189.
17. MARIN R. Hernandez/SARTOR G., “Time and norms: a formalisation in the event-calculus”, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, 1999, s. 90-100.
18. MARKWALDER N./SIMMLER Monika, Roboterstrafrecht, AJP, 2017 s. 171-182.
19. McCARTY L. T., “A Language for Legal Discourse I. Basic Features”, ICAIL '89 Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1989, s. 180-189.
20. McCARTY L. T., “An Implementation of Eisner v. Macomber”, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, 1995, s. 276-286.
21. MÜLLER M. F., Roboter und Recht, AJP, 2014, s. 595-608.
22. PRAKKEN H./SARTOR G., “A dialectical model of assessing conflicting legal arguments in legal reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 4, 1996, s. 331-368. PRAKKEN H./SARTOR G., “Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 6, 1998, s. 231-287.
23. PRAKKEN H./SARTOR G., “The role of logic in computational models of legal argument, a critical survey”, In A. Kakas and F. Sadri (eds.), Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond, Essays in Honour of Robert A. Kowalski, Part II, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2048, Berlin, 2002, s. 342-380.
24. PRAKKEN H., “AI and Law, logic and argument schemes”, Argumentation 19, 2005, s. 303-320.
25. SARTOR G., “Fundamental legal concepts: a formal and teleological characterization”, Artificial Intelligence and Law 14, 2006, s. 101-142.
26. SERGOT M. J./SADRİ F./KOWALSKİ R. A./KRIWACZEK F./HAMMOND P./CORY H. T., “The British Nationality Act as a logic program”, Communications of the ACM 29, 1986, s. 370-386.
27. SERGOT M. J., “A computational theory of normative positions”, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, Ekim 2001, s. 581-622.
28. WALTON D./GORDON T. F., “Modeling Critical Questions as Additional Premises”, Proceedings of the 8th International OSSA Conference, ed. F. Zenker, Windsor Ontario, 2011.
29. ZEYTİN Zafer, Edinilmiş Mallara Katılma Rejimi ve Tasfiyesi, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2017.
30. ZEYTİN Zafer, “Yasal Mal Rejiminde Katkı Alacağı ve Değer Artış Payı Alacağı İlişkisi”, Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, C: 10, S: 36, 2011, s. 299-317.
31. İnternet Kaynakları
32. www.kodlamadersi.com
33. www.spiegel.de
34. www.makinatek.com.tr
35. www.iso.org
36. wirtschaftslexikon.gabler.de
37. www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk
38. gfx.sueddeutsche.de
39. www.heise.de
40. www.techworld.com
41. www.robolaw.eu