Search

Artificial Intelligence and algorithms are fundamentally transforming most aspects of human activities, starting with decision- making paradigms. The criminal matter does not escape this phenomenon; actually, these technologies are a constant feature of current debates on the development of criminal justice policies. Until now, however, this trend has been especially evident with regard to the deployment of investigative tools that aim at supporting the work of law enforcement in crime prevention and repression. AI can already be used today as a support to better understand complex legal bases, overcoming factors such as multilingualism and divergent legal cultures that negatively a!fect the capacity of defence lawyers to understand the conceptual framework that lies beneath legal notions and textual provisions of other legal systems, even within the EU. This is to say, some forms of AI technology can help the legal operator, first of all the defendant and her defence counsel, to see through the layers of the textual expression and linguistic versions of the legal provisions, getting to the core of the legal notions. This may be obtained, as previously illustrated, by a computable approach to law, which exploits AI as a way to translate legal knowledge and reasoning in a symbolic representation that computers can understand and apply.

Artificial Intelligence and algorithms are fundamentally transforming most aspects of human activities, starting with decision- making paradigms. The criminal matter does not escape this phenomenon; actually, these technologies are a constant feature of current debates on the development of criminal justice policies. Until now, however, this trend has been especially evident with regard to the deployment of investigative tools that aim at supporting the work of law enforcement in crime prevention and repression. AI can already be used today as a support to better understand complex legal bases, overcoming factors such as multilingualism and divergent legal cultures that negatively a!fect the capacity of defence lawyers to understand the conceptual framework that lies beneath legal notions and textual provisions of other legal systems, even within the EU. This is to say, some forms of AI technology can help the legal operator, first of all the defendant and her defence counsel, to see through the layers of the textual expression and linguistic versions of the legal provisions, getting to the core of the legal notions. This may be obtained, as previously illustrated, by a computable approach to law, which exploits AI as a way to translate legal knowledge and reasoning in a symbolic representation that computers can understand and apply.

Introduction

conclusion

Il contributo presenta gli aspetti salienti della nuova proposta di regolamento dell'Intelligenza artificiale ponendo in luce gli approcci regolativi e i principali difetti.

Il 21 aprile 2021 la Commissione europea ha pubblicato la proposta di regolamento che stabilisce norme armonizzate sull'intelligenza artificiale (Artificial Intelligence Act). La proposta fornisce una definizione giuridica di IA, una metodo- logia per definire i sistemi IA ad alto rischio e dettaglia un quadro normativo al fine di fornire un quadro normativo per i sistemi IA compatibile con i diritti umani e i valori europei. Le regole riguardano i requisiti di progettazione e di gestione per i sistemi IA ad alto rischio, gli obblighi specifici per i fornitori di IA e altri attori coin- volti, i requisiti di trasparenza per i sistemi IA specifici, e un quadro complesso per l'applicazione, che comprende la standardizzazione, la certificazione e l'autovaluta- zione, nonché un nuovo sistema di supervisione, incentrato sull'Artificial Intelligence European Board. Il presente contributo analizza le principali questioni giuridiche e mette in luce l’approccio regolatorio. Trae alcune conclusioni per le raccomandazioni politiche.

This paper investigates some legal issues emerging from the adoption of Watson and similar AI systems in the medical area. In so doing, we explore a set of questions whose answers may heavily affect the liability allocation in misdiagnosis and/or improper treatment scenarios. Section 2 explores what are the distinctive features of new generation CDSS compared to the traditional ones. Section 3 investigates whether and to what extent such features pose questions with regard to the source of the decision making authority. Section 4 deals with the legal qualification and the conformity assessment procedure of these new AI CDSS, under the European discipline of Medical Device Software. In particular, we shall evaluate whether additional criterium for the classification of those systems are needed and how they can influence the certification procedures and the medical liability. Finally, section 5 explores how and to what extent the level of automation may affect the liability allocation. To this end, in section 6 we design some scenarios, which provide variations on the possible causes of failure in the decision making process and the consequent liability assessment.

Published online on 30 November 2020 This paper investigates the legal issues emerging from the adoption of clinical decision support systems (CDSS) based on artificial intelligence (AI). We explore a set of questions whose answers may affect the allocation of liability in misdiagnosis and/or improper treatment scenarios. The characteristic features of new-generation CDSS based on AI raise new challenges. In particular, the argument is made that a new shared decision-making authority model shall be adopted, in line with the analysis of the task–responsibility allocation. It is also suggested that the level of automation should be taken into account in classifying these systems under the European regulations on medical device software. This classification may indeed affect not only the certification procedures but also the allocation of liability. To this end, we finally design some scenarios providing variations on the possible causes of failure in the decision-making process and the consequent liability assessment.

The paper presents the main areas of application of predictive systems based on algorithmic and AI technology, and analyses their impact on fundamental rights and fair trial principles. It focuses in particular on the definition of the right to an effective remedy against decisions taken (also) with the support of algorithmic and AI systems, and proposes some innovative solutions on how to ensure compliance with this right in technologically advanced criminal proceedings.

The present contribution aims to address the ways in which legal phi- losophy approached and conceptualised the emergence of information technologies between the 1960s and 1970s. We will do that by examining the contributions of four thinkers, coming from different philosophical and ideological backgrounds: Vittorio Frosini, Mario Losano, Luigi Lombardi Vallauri and Renato Borruso. These authors look into the evolution of law and technology from different perspectives that are representative of different approaches to legal theory: the evolutions of ide- alism (Frosini), analytic philosophy combined with positivism (Losano), anti-positivism in combination with ethical/axiological inquiry (Lombardi Vallauri), as well as the more practical policy-oriented approach of legal practitioners (Borruso).

L’articolo illustra i principali ambiti di applicazione dei sistemi predittivi e analizza il loro impatto sui diritti fondamentali e sui principi dell’equo processo, concentrandosi in particolare sulla definizione di ricorso effettivo applicabile contro decisioni assunte (anche) col supporto di sistemi algoritmici e di IA. The paper presents the main areas of application of predictive systems and analyses their impact on fundamental rights and fair trial principles. It focuses in particular on the definition of the right to an effective remedy against decisions taken (also) with the support of algorithmic and AI systems.

Il contributo analizza gli aspetti informatico-giuridici del crowdfunding equity e del crowdfunding lending, con particolare riguardo alle iniziative poste in essere da Università e Musei. In particolare, si approfondiscono gli aspetti di responsabilità dei gestori delle piattaforme, in relazione al Decreto Legislativo 107/2003, e gli aspetti relativi alla protezione dei dati personali, in relazione al Regolamento (UE) n. 2016/679.

Il contributo analizza le principali questioni informatico-giuridiche relative al crowdfunding donativo. In particolare, si esplorano gli aspetti di responsabilità dei gestori di piattaforme in quanto prestatori di servizi nel mercato dell'informazione, aspetti relativi alla privacy e data protection, e la tutela del diritto d'autore .