If Robots Cause Harm, Who is to Blame? Self-Driving Cars and Criminal Liability

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Gless ◽  
Emily Silverman ◽  
Thomas Weigend
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Self Driving Cars

scholarly journals Self-Driving Cars and Criminal Liability

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Béla Csitei
Keyword(s):  
Autonomous Vehicles ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Autonomous Vehicle ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Criminal Sanction ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Self Driving Cars

After clarifying the concepts of automated and autonomous vehicles, the purpose of the study is to investigate how reasonable the criminal sanction is arising from accidents caused by autonomous vehicles. The next question to be answered is that the definition of the crime according to the Hungarian law may be applied in case of traffic related criminal offences caused by automated and autonomous vehicles. During my research I paid special attention to two essential elements of criminal offence, namely the human act and guilt. Furthermore, I strived for finding solution for the next problem, as well: if the traffic related criminal offence is committed by driving an autonomous vehicle, how to define the subject of criminal liability.

scholarly journals Civil and criminal liability for damage caused by self–driving cars

2021 ◽  
pp. 182-210
Author(s):  
Deimantė Rimkutė ◽  
Kristijonas Povylius
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Self Driving Cars

The article aims to analyse and assess whether the existing legal regulation in Lithuania is sufficient for application of civil and criminal liability for damage caused by fully self–driving cars. This hypothesis is confirmed by analysing the technical specifics of fully self–driving cars, the legal regulation of civil and criminal liability in Lithuania and the main theories of these types of liability.

If Robots cause harm, Who is to blame? Self-driving Cars and Criminal Liability

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Gless ◽  
Emily Silverman ◽  
Thomas Weigend
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Retributive Punishment ◽  
Harm To Others ◽  
Self Driving Cars

The fact that robots, especially self-driving cars, have become part of our daily lives raises novel issues in criminal law. Robots can malfunction and cause serious harm. But as things stand today, they are not suitable recipients of criminal punishment, mainly because they cannot conceive of themselves as morally responsible agents and because they cannot understand the concept of retributive punishment. Humans who produce, program, market, and employ robots are subject to criminal liability for intentional crime if they knowingly use a robot to cause harm to others. A person who allows a self-teaching robot to interact with humans can foresee that the robot might get out of control and cause harm. This fact alone may give rise to negligence liability. In light of the overall social benefits associated with the use of many of today’s robots, however, the authors argue in favor of limiting the criminal liability of operators to situations where they neglect to undertake reasonable measures to control the risks emanating from robots.

Artificial Intelligence in Logistics

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-60
Author(s):  
László Kota
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Computing Power ◽  
Self Driving Cars

The artificial intelligence undergoes an enormous development since its appearance in the fifties. The computing power has grown exponentially since then, enabling the use of artificial intelligence applications in different areas. Since then, artificial intelligence applications are not only present in the industry, but they have slowly conquered households as well. Their use in logistics is becoming more and more widespread, just think of self-driving cars and trucks. In this paper, the author attempts to summarize and present the artificial intelligence logistical applications, its development and impact on logistics.

PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN KERUGIAN NEGARA DALAM PENGELOLAAN KEUANGAN DAERAH

EDUKASI ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendra Karianga
Keyword(s):  
Financial Management ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Regional Finance ◽  
Regional Budget ◽  
State Finance ◽  
Budget Policy ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact

Sources of revenue and expenditure of APBD (regional budget) can be allocated to finance the compulsory affairs and optional affairs in the form of programs and activities related to the improvement of public services, job creation, poverty alleviation, improvement of environmental quality, and regional economic growth. The implications of these policies is the need for funds to finance the implementation of the functions, that have become regional authority, is also increasing. In practice, regional financial management still poses a complicated issue because the regional head are reluctant to release pro-people regional budget policy, even implication of regional autonomy is likely to give birth to little kings in region causing losses to state finance and most end up in legal proceedings. This paper discusses the loss of state finance and forms of liability for losses to the state finance. The result of the study can be concluded firstly,  there are still many differences in giving meaning and definition of the loss of state finace and no standard definition of state losses, can cause difficulties. The difficulty there is in an effort to determine the amount of the state finance losses. The calculation of state/regions losses that occur today is simply assessing the suitability of the size of the budget and expenditure without considering profits earned by the community and the impact of the use of budget to the community. Secondly, the liability for losses to the state finance is the fulfillment of the consequences for a person to give or to do something in the regional financial management by giving birth to three forms of liability, namely the Criminal liability, Civil liability, and Administrative liability.Keywords: state finance losses, liability, regional finance.

A Truce in Criminal Law’s Distributive Principle Wars?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 565-583
Author(s):  
Paul H. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
A Value ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Past Wrongs

Crime-control utilitarians and retributivist philosophers have long been at war over the appropriate distributive principle for criminal liability and punishment, with little apparent possibility of reconciliation between the two. In the utilitarians’ view, the imposition of punishment can be justified only by the practical benefit that it provides: avoiding future crime. In the retributivists’ view, doing justice for past wrongs is a value in itself that requires no further justification. The competing approaches simply use different currencies: fighting future crime versus doing justice for past wrongs. It is argued here that the two are in fact reconcilable, in a fashion. We cannot declare a winner in the distributive principle wars but something more like a truce. Specifically, good utilitarians ought to support a distributive principle based upon desert because the empirical evidence suggests that doing justice for past wrongdoing is likely the most effective and efficient means of controlling future crime. A criminal justice system perceived by the community as conflicting with its principles of justice provokes resistance and subversion, whereas a criminal justice system that earns a reputation for reliably doing justice is one whose moral credibility inspires deference, assistance, and acquiescence, and is more likely to have citizens internalize its norms of what is truly condemnable conduct. Retributivists ought to support empirical desert as a distributive principle because, while it is indeed distinct from deontological desert, there exists an enormous overlap between the two, and it seems likely that empirical desert may be the best practical approximation of deontological desert. Indeed, some philosophers would argue that the two are necessarily the same.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document