logo czasopisma

Articles

Vol. 58 No. 5 (2025): Prawo i Więź nr 5 (58) 2025

From Slave to Electronic Legal Entity – Considerations on Legal Subjectivity for AI

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36128/qjfzg275
Submitted
28 October 2024
Published
18-11-2025

Abstract

The impressive development of new technology in recent years and the creation of machines equipped with artificial intelligence systems that are used in an increasing range of tasks required us, to the discussion of the development of artificial intelligence in relation to its responsibility and legal subjectivity. The aim of this article is to compare concepts regarding a legal entity for artificial intelligent agents based on Polish law and EU law. The research activity adopted in the article is supported by a theoretical method that brings together the professional literature and practitioners who use control over technology, including artificial intelligence, on a daily basis. Additionally, the article is supplemented by a dogmatic and legal analysis of the provisions of the Polish Civil Code, the Animal Protection Act and soft law instruments.

References

  1. AIA (Artificial Intelligence Act) z dnia13 marca 2024 r. (Dz.U. UE L 2024.1689 z 12.07.2024 r.).
    View in Google Scholar
  2. Bellia, Anthony. “Contracting with Electronic Agents.” Emory Law Journal, nr 50 (2001): 1047 – 1092.
    View in Google Scholar
  3. Beranger, Jerome. Societal Responsibility of Artificial Intelligence. Towards an Ethical and Eco-Responsible AI. Hoboken: Wiley, 2021.
    View in Google Scholar
  4. Bertolini, Andrea i Francesca Episcopo. “Robots and AI as Legal Subjects? Disentangling the Ontological and Functional Perspective.” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, nr 9 (2022): 1 – 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.842213.
    View in Google Scholar
  5. Bertolini, Andrea. Artificial Intelligence and Civil Liability. Legal Affairs, Study Requested by the JURI Committee. 2020, 1 – 136.
    View in Google Scholar
  6. Bertolini, Andrea. “Robots as Products: The Case for a Realistic Analysis of Robotics Applications and Liability Rules.” Law, Innovation and Technology, nr 5 (2) (2013): 214 – 247. https://doi.org/10.5235/17579961.5.2.214.
    View in Google Scholar
  7. Bielska-Brodziak, Agnieszka. O czym mówią prawnicy, mówiąc o podmiotowości. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, 2015.
    View in Google Scholar
  8. Brenner, Walter, Rüdiger Zarnekow i Hartmut Wittig. Intelligent Software Agents: Foundations and Applications. Berlin–New York: Springer, 1998.
    View in Google Scholar
  9. Bryson, Joanna, Mihailis Diamantis, i Thomas Grant. Of, for, and by the People: The Legal Lacuna of Synthetic Persons. Berlin: Springer, 2017.
    View in Google Scholar
  10. Bryson, Joanna. “Robots Should Be Slaves.” W Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological, Ethical and Design Issues, red. Yorick Wilks, 63 – 74. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing, 2010.
    View in Google Scholar
  11. Chesterman, Simon. “Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of Legal Personality.” NUS Law Working Paper, vol. 69, issue 4 (2020): 819 – 844. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589320000366.
    View in Google Scholar
  12. Chopra, Samir i Laurence White. A Legal Theory for Autonomous Artificial Agents. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  13. Corrales, Marcelo, Mark Fenwick i Nikolaus Forgó. Robotics, AI and the Future of Law. Berlin: Springer, 2018.
    View in Google Scholar
  14. Eidenmüller, Horst. “Robots’ Legal Personality.” Oxford Business Law Blog (2017). https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2017/03/robots’-legal-personality.
    View in Google Scholar
  15. Fingar, Peter. Competing for The Future with Intelligent Agents and a Confession (2018). https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2018/11/11/competing-for-the-future-with-intelligent-agents-and-a-confession/.
    View in Google Scholar
  16. Gaon, Aviv. The Future of Copyright in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Cheltenham: Elgar Law, 2021
    View in Google Scholar
  17. Gellers, Joshua. Rights for Robots. Artificial Intelligence, Animal and Environmental Law. New York: Routledge, 2021.
    View in Google Scholar
  18. Goettel, Mieczysław. Sytuacja zwierzęcia w prawie cywilnym. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2013.
    View in Google Scholar
  19. Hildebrandt, Mireille i Antoinette Rouvroy. Law, Human Agency, and Autonomic Computing. The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology. New York: Routledge, 2011.
    View in Google Scholar
  20. van den Hoven van Genderen, Robert. “Robot Law, a Necessity or Legal Science Fiction? Machine Medical Ethics and What About the Law?” Intelligent Systems, vol. 74 (2015): 167 – 177. http:// www.switchlegal.nl/robot-law-a-necessity-or-legal-science-fiction-machi- ne-medical-ethics-and-what-about-the-law/.
    View in Google Scholar
  21. Kelley, Richard, Enrique Schaerer, Micaela Gomez i Monica Nicolescu. “Liability in Robotics: An International Perspective on Robots as Animals.” Advanced Robotics, 13 (2010): 1861 – 1871. https://doi.org/10.1163/016918610X527194.
    View in Google Scholar
  22. Kerrigan, Charles. Artificial Intelligence. Law and Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2022.
    View in Google Scholar
  23. Kodeks cywilny z dnia 23 kwietnia 1964 r. (Dz.U. z 2023 r., poz. 1933).
    View in Google Scholar
  24. Kodeks rodzinny i opiekuńczy z dnia 25 lutego 1994 r. (Dz.U. z 2023 r., poz. 2809).
    View in Google Scholar
  25. Kovac, Mitja. Judgment-Proof Robots and Artificial Intelligence. A Comparative Law and Economics Approach. London: Palgrave, 2020.
    View in Google Scholar
  26. Krasuski, Andrzej. Status prawny sztucznego agenta. Podstawy prawne zastosowania sztucznej inteligencji. Warszawa: C.H. Beck, 2021.
    View in Google Scholar
  27. Księżak, Paweł. „My, Naród? Konstytucjonalizacja sztucznej inteligencji, czyli o potrzebie przemodelowania założeń ustrojowych.” Przegląd Sejmowy, nr 4 (165) (2021): 65 – 87. https://doi.org/10.31268/PS.2021.46.
    View in Google Scholar
  28. Kurki, Visa i Tomasz Pietrzykowski. Legal Personhood: Animals, Artificial Intelligence and the Unborn. Berlin: Springer, 2017.
    View in Google Scholar
  29. van der Meulen, Sjoukje i Max Bruinsma. “Man as «Aggregate of Data». What Computers Shouldn’t Do.” AI & Society, vol. 34, (2019): 343 – 354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-018-0852-6.
    View in Google Scholar
  30. Męcina, Jacek. Od cyfryzacji i robotyzacji do sztucznej inteligencji. Wyzwania dla gospodarki i rynku pracy. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 2023.
    View in Google Scholar
  31. Nazar, Mirosław. „Normatywna dereifikacja zwierząt.” W Prawna ochrona zwierząt, red. Mozgawa Marek, 133 – 134. Lublin: Oficyna Wydawnicza Verba, 2002.
    View in Google Scholar
  32. Negri, Sergio M.C. Avila. “Robot as Legal Person: Electronic Personhood in Robotics and Artificial Intelligence.” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, nr 8 (2021): 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.789327.
    View in Google Scholar
  33. Open Letter to the European Comission, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. http://robotics-openletter.eu.
    View in Google Scholar
  34. Pietrzykowski, Tomasz. „Problem podmiotowości prawnej zwierząt z perspektywy filozofii prawa.” Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria, nr 2 (94) (2015): 247 – 259.
    View in Google Scholar
  35. Robaczyński, Wojciech. „AI a audyt. Sztuczna inteligencja – przedmiot badań czy podmiot kontrolowany.” Kontrola Państwowa, nr 6 (2022): 8 – 29. https://doi.org/10.53122/ISSN.0452-5027/2022.1.42.
    View in Google Scholar
  36. Sartor, Giovannni. “Cognitive Automata and the Law: Electronic Contracting and the Intentionality of Software Agents.” Artificial Intelligence and Law, nr 17 (4) (2009): 253 – 290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-009-9081-0.
    View in Google Scholar
  37. Scherer, Matthew. “Of Wild Beasts and Digital Analogues: The Legal Status of Autonomous Systems.” Nevada Law Journal, vol. 19, nr 1 (2019): 259 – 291.
    View in Google Scholar
  38. Solaiman, Sheikh M. “Legal Personality of Robots, Corporations, Idols and Chimpanzees: A quest for Legitimacy.” Artificial Intelligence and Law, nr 25 (2) (2017): 155 – 179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-016-9192-3.
    View in Google Scholar
  39. Solum, Lawrence. “Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligences.” North Carolina Law Review, vol. 70 (1992): 1231 – 1288. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003074991-37.
    View in Google Scholar
  40. Świerczyński, Marek. Delikty internetowe w prawie prywatnym międzynarodowym. Kraków: Zakamycze, 2006.
    View in Google Scholar
  41. Świerczyński, Marek. Prawo sztucznej inteligencji. Warszawa: C.H. Beck, 2020.
    View in Google Scholar
  42. Teubner, Gunther. “Digital Personhood? The Status of Autonomous Software Agents in Private Law.” Ancilla Iuris, vol. 7 (2018): 106 – 149.
    View in Google Scholar
  43. Turner, Jacob. Robot Rules. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.
    View in Google Scholar
  44. Ustawa o ochronie zwierząt z dnia 21 sierpnia 1997 r. (Dz.U. z 2022 r., poz. 2375).
    View in Google Scholar
  45. Wallin, Lisa. Edo Automata: Tracing Japan’s Robot Heritage to Feudal-Era Karakuri Dolls. https://www.tokyoweekender.com/art_and_culture/japanese-culture/edo-automata-tracing-japans-robot-heritage-to-feudal-era-karakuri-dolls/.
    View in Google Scholar
  46. Waltermann, Antonia. “On the Legal Responsibility of Artificially Intelligent Agents: Addressing Three Misconceptions.” Technology and Regulation (2021): 35 – 43. https://doi.org/10.71265/zyckpp83.
    View in Google Scholar
  47. Wojtczak, Sylwia. “Endowing Artificial Intelligence with Legal Subjectivity.” AI & Society, nr 37 (2022): 205 – 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01147-7.
    View in Google Scholar
  48. Yampolsky, Roman. “AI Personhood: Rights and Laws.” W Advances in Human and Social Aspects of Technology. Machine Law, Ethics, and Morality in the Age of AI, red. Steven John Thompson, 4. Hershey: IG Global, 2021.
    View in Google Scholar

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.