BETA

Activities of Max ANDERSSON related to 2015/2103(INL)

Shadow reports (1)

2016/11/22
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2015/2103(INL)
Documents: PDF(573 KB) DOC(118 KB)

Amendments (32)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the full range of 'soft impacts' on human dignity may be difficult to estimate, ~~but will still need to be consider~~developments in robotics and artificial intelligence can and should be designed ifn a~~nd when robots replace human care and companionship, and whereas questions of human dignity also can arise in the context of~~ way that they preserve the dignity, autonomy and self-determination of the individual, especially in the fields of human care and companionship, and in the context of medical appliances, 'repairing' or enhancing human beings;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas further development and increased use of automated and algorithmic decision-making undoubtedly has an impact on the choices that a private person (such as a business or an internet user) and an administrative, judicial or other public authority take in rendering their final decision of a consumer, business or authoritative nature; whereas safeguards and the possibility of human control and verification need to be built into the process of automated and algorithmic decision-making;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas, thanks to the impressive technological advances of the last decade, not only are today's robots able to perform activities which used to be typically and exclusively human, but the development of certain autonomous and cognitive features – e.g. the ability to learn from experience and take quasi-independent decisions – has made them more and more similar to agents that interact with their environment and are able to alter it significantly; whereas, in such a context, the legal responsibility arising ~~from~~through a robot’s harmful action becomes a crucial issue;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas ~~a robot's~~ autonomy ~~can be~~is defined as the ability to take decisions and implement them in the outside world, independently of external control or influence; whereas thise autonomy of a robot or of artificial intelligence is of a purely technological nature and its degree depends on how sophisticated a robot's interaction with its environment has been designed to be;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the more autonomous robots are, the less they can be considered simple tools in the hands of other actors (such as the manufacturer, the owner, the user, etc.); whereas this, in turn, ~~mak~~significantly challenges the ordinary rules on liability ~~insufficient and calls~~and calls for considering the need for new rules which focus on how a machine can be held – partly or entirely – responsible for its acts or omissions; whereas, as a consequence, it becomes more and more urgent to address the fundamental question of whether robots should possess a legal statuutonomous systems and self-learning machines can be subject to adapted civil liability rules;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas, automation blurs the lines between legal subjects and objects, and ultimately, robots' autonomy raises the question of their nature in the light of the existing legal categories – of whether they should be regarded as natural persons, legal persons, animals or objects – or whether a new ~~category~~legal status should be created, with its own specific features and implications as regards the attribution of rights and duties, including liability for damage;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)

Ta. whereas it is unclear by which responsibility scheme distributed autonomous organisations (DAOs), organisations run by rules encoded in computer programmes, would abide under the law, while such legal uncertainty can significantly impact research, innovation, industrial development and consumer protection;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Recital X

X. whereas the shortcomings of the current legal framework are apparent in the area of contractual liability insofar as machines designed to choose their counterparts, negotiate contractual terms, conclude contracts and decide whether and how to implement them make the traditional rules inapplicable, which highlights the need for new, more up-to- date ones, applicable to robots acting as contracting parties;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to propose a common European definition of smart autonomous robots and their subcategories by taking into consideration the following characteristics of a smart robot and an autonomous system: o acquires autonomy through sensors and/or by exchanging data with its environment (inter-connectivity) and trades and analyses data o is self-learning (optional criterion) o has a physical support or is connected to a software programme without being embedded in a physical support o adapts its behaviours and actions to its environment;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that many robotic applications are still in an experimental phase; welcomes the fact that more and more research projects are being funded with national and European money; calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen financial instruments for research projects in robotics and ICT, including public-private partnerships; emphasises that sufficient resources need to be devoted to the search for solutions to the social and ethical challenges that the technological development and its applications raise, the sole focus on technology being insufficient without the simultaneous development of a completed neuroscience taking into account human abilities and safety;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Asks the Commission to foster research programmes that include a mechanism for short-term verification of the outcomes in order to understand what real risks and opportunities are associated with the dissemination of these technologies; calls on the Commission to combine all its effort in order to guarantee a smoother transition for these technologies from research to commercialisation on the market, after proper risk and safety evaluation, registration and other necessary technical checks; calls for the creation of a European-wide research and development project on robotics and neuroscience;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes that the development of artificial intelligence and robotics should be done in such a manner that the environmental impact is limited through effective energy consumption, the use of renewable energy and of scarce materials, and minimal waste and reparability.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Calls on the Commission and Member states to stimulate research on the possible long-term risks of artificial intelligence and robotics technologies, and on how they might be mitigated or avoided;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the potential for empowerment through the use of robotics is nuanced by a set of tensions or risks relating to human safety, privacy, integrity, dignity, autonomy, self-determination and data ownership;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that there are no legal provisions that specifically apply to robotics, but that existing legal regimes and doctrines can be readily applied to robotics while some aspects appear to need specific consideration; calls on the Commission to come forward with a balanced approach to intellectual property rights when applied to hardware and software standards, and codes that protect innovation and at the same time foster innovation~~; calls on the Commission to elaborate criteria for an ‘own intellectual creation’ for copyrightable works produced by computers or robots~~, in a context where intellectual property rights can present a risk of preventing access to hardware and software data when such access, especially to source-code, may enable solutions to potentially high and still unknown risks; calls therefore for reinforced exceptions, such as reverse engineering, on computer programmes, not to be overridden by contract;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. recalls that in the Continental European understanding of authorship, the concept of 'intellectual creation' is tied to the author's personality, meant to apply to natural persons, and therefore artificial agents such as robots and artificial intelligence shall not be considered as authors, and information produced by them shall not be eligible to copyright protection;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Notes that the collection, processing, storing and analysing of big data – such as through autonomous vehicles – might require a change and further development of the current personal data protection regime;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Points out that the ~~use~~provision of pser~~sonal data as a 'currency' with which services can be 'bought'~~vices without payment of money but in exchange of personal data raises new issues in need of clarification; stresses that the use of personal data as a 'currency' must not lead to a circumvention of the ~~basic principles governing the right to privacy and data protection;~~ principles governing the right to privacy and data protection enshrined in Directives of the European Parliament and of the Council 95/46/EC1a and 2002/58/EC1b and with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council1c , and shall abide by the consumer protection principles laid down in Directive on contracts for the supply of digital content (2015/0287); __________________ 1aDirective 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31). 1bDirective 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.07.2002, p 37), called, as amended by Directives 2006/24/EC and 2009/136/EC, the "e- Privacy Directive". 1cRegulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Considers that algorithms not protected by copyright but protected otherwise, e.g. by trade-secrets, should be subject to the same possibility of reverse- engineering as copyright protected computer programmes; underlines the need for SMEs and non-digital industries to get access to technology in good competition conditions, in view of a swift and balanced development of robotic and artificial intelligence markets;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. CHighlights that the issue of setting standards and granting interoperability is key for future competition in the field of artificial intelligence and robotics technologies; calls on the Commission to continue to work on the international harmonisation of technical standards, in particular together with the European Standardisation Organisations and the International Standardisation Organisation, in order to avoid fragmentation of the internal market and to meet consumers’ concerns; asks the Commission to analyse existing European legislation with a view to checking the need for adaption in light of the development of robotics and artificial intelligence, in particular in light of a future dedicated registration system;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes the great advances delivered by and further potential of robotics in the field of repairing and compensating for damaged organs and human functions, but also the complex questions raised in particular by the possibilities of human enhancement; asks for the establishment of committees on robot ethics in hospitals and other health care institutions tasked with considering and assisting in resolving unusual, complicated ethical problems involving issues that affect the care and treatment of patients; recommends the creation of independent trusted entities to retain the means necessary to provide persons carrying vital and advanced medical appliances with care, such as maintenance, repairs and enhancements, including software updates fixing malfunctions and vulnerabilities, especially in the case where such maintenance is no longer carried out by the original supplier; suggests creating an obligation for manufacturers to supply these independent trusted entities with comprehensive design instructions including source code, similar to the legal deposit of publications to a national library; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop guidelines to aid in the establishment and functioning of such committees and entities;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Considers that robots' and artificial intelligence's civil liability is a crucial issue which needs to be addressed at EU level so as to ensure the same degree of transparency, consistency and legal certainty throughout the European Union for the benefit of consumers and businesses alike;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Proposes to make the documentation of AI's and robots' actions mandatory, in order to help attribute fault when accidents occur; encourages design methods making AI's and robots' behaviours ethically and/or legally verifiable, allowing to provide for certain elements of proof about the causal link between the actions and the principles being obeyed through the software programme, such design element being subject to monitoring and inquiry in a human-accessible way;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Points out that a possible solution to the complexity of allocating responsibility for damage caused by increasingly autonomous robots could be an obligatory insurance scheme, as is already the case, for instance, with cars; notes, nevertheless, that unlike the insurance system for road traffic, where the insurance covers human acts and failures, an insurance system for robotics could be based on the obligation of the producer and owner to take out an insurance for the autonomous robots ~~it produces~~;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 – point f a (new)

f a) creating rules as to certain robots and artificial intelligence appliances to cease to function at any time a producer or owner so decides in a safe manner, thereby enabling human control, while taking into account the ethical aspects involved; to consider how a smart robot could, should this be necessary, cease to interact with other appliances or robots, in particular in the framework of Internet of Things;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)

Any chosen legal solution applied to ~~robots' liability~~the liability of robots and of artificial intelligence in cases other than those of damage to property should in no way restrict the type or the extent of the damages which may be recovered, nor should it limit the forms of compensation which may be offered to the aggrieved party on the sole grounds that damage is caused by a non-human agent.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 a (new) (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)

Any policy decision on the civil liability rules applicable to robots and artificial intelligence should be taken with due consultation of a European-wide research and development project dedicated to robotics and neuroscience, with scientists and experts able to assess all related risks and consequences;

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)

The interoperability of network-connected autonomous robots that interact with each other should be ensured. Access to the source code, input data, and construction details should be available when needed ~~in order~~, to investigate accidents and damage caused by 'smart robots', as well as in order to ensure their continued operation, availability, reliability, safety and security.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 2 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)

~~Criteria for~~As the concept of ‘intellectual creation’ ~~for copyright able works produced by computers or robots should be drawn up~~is tied to the personality of an author, artificial agents such as robots and artificial intelligence should not be eligible for copyright protection.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 2 (after heading ‘CHARTER ON ROBOTICS’)

The framework, made in consultation with a European-wide research and development project dedicated to robotics and neuroscience, must be designed in a reflective manner that allows individual adjustments to be made on a case-by-case basis in order to assess whether a given behaviour is right or wrong in a given situation and to take decisions in accordance with a pre-set hierarchy of values.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Fundamental Rights’)

Robotics research activities should respect fundamental rights and be conducted in the interests of the well-being ofand self- determination of the individuals and society at large in their design, implementation, dissemination and use. Human dignity and autonomy – both physical and psychological – is always to be respected.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – bullepoint 1 (after subheading ‘LICENCE FOR DESIGNERS’)

• You should take into account the European values of dignity, autonomy and self-determination, freedom and justice before, during and after the process of design, development and delivery of such technologies including the need not to harm, injure, deceive or exploit (vulnerable) users.

2016/10/26
Committee: JURI