论人工智能民事主体资格之否定
网络安全与数据治理
陈思敏,蔡唱
海南大学法学院
摘要: 人工智能的民事主体资格是人工智能发展过程中亟需解决的重要问题。首先,承认人工智能民事主体资格有破坏人类中心地位的倾向,违背民事主体制度所蕴含的人文精神。为人类服务的人工智能不具有独立意志,无法取得与民事主体同等的法律地位,不符合平等理念的要求。其次,人工智能具有可复制性,缺乏个体差异性,无法以自己名义从事民事活动。人工智能受到人类的控制和决定,不具备独立自主性,不享有独立财产,无法独立对外承担民事责任,不满足民事主体的各个构成要件。最后,人工智能仅具有技术层面的理性,区别于人类理性,缺乏民事预设主体的理性基础。
中图分类号:D923文献标识码:ADOI:10.19358/j.issn.2097-1788.2024.09.012
引用格式:陈思敏,蔡唱.论人工智能民事主体资格之否定[J].网络安全与数据治理,2024,43(9):71-76,83.
引用格式:陈思敏,蔡唱.论人工智能民事主体资格之否定[J].网络安全与数据治理,2024,43(9):71-76,83.
The discussion on the denial of civil subject qualification of artificial intelligence
Chen Simin,Cai Chang
Law School, Hainan University
Abstract: The civil subject qualification of artificial intelligence is an important problem to be solved urgently in the development of artificial intelligence. First of all, recognizing the qualification of artificial intelligence as a civil subject undermines the central position of human beings, and violates the humanistic spirit contained in the civil subject system. Artificial intelligence for human beings doesn′t have independent will, can′t achieve the same status as a civil subject, and doesn′t meet the requirements of the concept of equality. Secondly, artificial intelligence is reproducible and lacks individual differences, so it can′t engage in civil activities in its own name. Artificial intelligence is controlled and decided by human beings. It doesn′t have independence and independent property, and can′t bear civil liability independently. In all, Artificial intelligence doesn′t meet the elements of civil subjects. Finally, artificial intelligence only has technical rationality, which is different from human rationality. So it lacks the rational basis of civil presupposition subject.
Key words : artificial intelligence; civil subject qualification; humanistic spirit; equality and rationality; independent
引言
现代科技的发展带动着人工智能呈现出对人类的“超模拟”,促使其智能化程度越来越高。人工智能不仅给人类生产生活带来诸多便利,也引发了一系列的法律问题,譬如人工智能的民事主体资格问题、人工智能侵权的责任承担问题、人工智能生成物的定性和归属问题。人工智能的民事主体资格问题是诸多问题中最基本和最重要的问题,人工智能的主体(或客体)定位影响着侵权责任的分配和承担,关系着人工智能生成物的保护与否问题。
学界针对人工智能的民事主体资格出现了争论,肯定说认为应当赋予人工智能民事主体资格,将其拟制为“电子法人” “电子人”或“代理人”等。否定说认为人工智能是人类发明创造出来的技术工具,属于民事客体,不可赋予其民事主体资格。折中说则主张不赋予人工智能完整的民事主体资格,而是承认人工智能的有限主体资格,仅享有有限的权利,承担有限的义务和责任,同时也否认智能化程度较低的人工智能的民事主体资格。
为迎接人工智能技术发展带来的各种挑战和风险,应依据民事主体制度蕴含的人文精神和平等理念判断人工智能的民法地位,从民事主体的构成要件逐一考察人工智能是否符合条件,从民事主体的理性基础分析人工智能是否具备人类理性,并慎重考虑人工智能的民事主体资格问题,不可简单随意地承认或者否定人工智能的主体资格。
本文详细内容请下载:
https://www.chinaaet.com/resource/share/2000006167
作者信息:
陈思敏,蔡唱
(海南大学法学院,海南海口570228)
此内容为AET网站原创,未经授权禁止转载。