Journal Browser
Open Access Journal Article

Legal Frameworks for AI Ethics and Accountability

by Sarah Thomas 1,*
1
Sarah Thomas
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
FLPR  2021, 23; 3(2), 23; https://doi.org/10.69610/j.flpr.20211012
Received: 25 August 2021 / Accepted: 21 September 2021 / Published Online: 12 October 2021

Abstract

This paper examines the evolving legal frameworks that aim to govern the ethical use and accountability of artificial intelligence (AI). With the rapid advancement of AI technologies, concerns over potential misuse, biases, and unintended consequences have heightened. The paper discusses the challenges of applying traditional legal constructs to AI systems, which often operate on principles of autonomy and machine learning that defy traditional notions of control and causation. It outlines key legal constructs such as liability, consent, privacy, and transparency, and explores how they are being adapted to address AI-specific issues. The paper further analyzes the varying approaches adopted by different jurisdictions in regulating AI, including the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the United States' proposed AI Act, and China's AI Development Strategy. Finally, it assesses the effectiveness of these frameworks in ensuring ethical AI and proposes areas where further legal developments are needed.


Copyright: © 2021 by Thomas. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Thomas, S. Legal Frameworks for AI Ethics and Accountability. Frontiers of Law & Policy Research, 2021, 3, 23. https://doi.org/10.69610/j.flpr.20211012
AMA Style
Thomas S. Legal Frameworks for AI Ethics and Accountability. Frontiers of Law & Policy Research; 2021, 3(2):23. https://doi.org/10.69610/j.flpr.20211012
Chicago/Turabian Style
Thomas, Sarah 2021. "Legal Frameworks for AI Ethics and Accountability" Frontiers of Law & Policy Research 3, no.2:23. https://doi.org/10.69610/j.flpr.20211012
APA style
Thomas, S. (2021). Legal Frameworks for AI Ethics and Accountability. Frontiers of Law & Policy Research, 3(2), 23. https://doi.org/10.69610/j.flpr.20211012

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (2000). Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education. Westview Press.
  2. European Union. (2016). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
  3. United States of America. (2019). Artificial Intelligence Act.
  4. People's Republic of China. (2017). AI Development Strategy.
  5. Winograd, T., & Flores, F. A. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Addison-Wesley.
  6. Johnson, L. B. (1987). The Inhumane Computer. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 25-50). MIT Press.
  7. Foster, N., & Kaplan, A. (2001). Privacy and Computing. John Wiley & Sons.
  8. Roth, A. (1991). Privacy and the Public Interest. University of California Press.
  9. Aswani, S., Aswani, V., & Aswani, P. (2003). Legal Implications of Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Business and Technology Law, 1(2), 45-56.
  10. Suleiman, A. (2001). The Legal Implications of AI: A Survey of Issues. Computer Law & Security Review, 17(3), 153-176.
  11. Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big Data's Disparate Impact. California Law Review, 103(6), 1411-1504.
  12. Edelman, B.,, Ziewitz, M., & O'Neil, C. (2016). The AI Paradox. MIT Press.
  13. Calo, R., & Ho, A. (2017). How to Regulate AI. Stanford Technology Law Review, 20(2), 259-312.
  14. Heywood, L., S(time), A., & Weizenbaum, J. (2016). The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press.