Hybrid theory of corporate legal personhood and its application to artificial intelligence

Araujo T et al (2020) In AI We Trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence. AI Soc 35(3):611–623 Avila Negri SMC (2021) Robot as legal person: electronic personhood in robotics and artificial intelligence. Front Robot and AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.789327 Banteka N (2021) Artificially Intelligent Persons. Houston Law Rev 58(3):537–596 Bartneck C et al (2020) An introduction to ethics in robotics and AI. Springer International Publishing AG, Cham Bayamlıoğlu E, Leenes R (2018) The ’Rule of Law’ implications of data-driven decision-making: a techno-regulatory perspective. Law Innov Technol 10(22):295–313 Beck S (2016) The problem of ascribing legal responsibility in the case of robotics. AI Soc 31:473–481 Berle A Jr (1952) Constitutional limitations on corporate activity-protection of personal rights from invasion through economic power. Univ Pa Law Rev 100(7):933–955 Bertolini A, Episcopo F (2022) Robots and AI as legal subjects disentangling the ontological and functional perspective. Front Robot AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.842213 Bryson JJ et al (2017) Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artif Intell Law 25(3):273–291 Cappuro R (2012) Towards a comparative theory of agents. AI Soc 2012(27):479–488 Chatman CN (2018) The corporate personhood two-step. Nevada Law J 18(3):811–861 Chen J, Burgess P (2019) The boundaries of legal personhood: how spontaneous intelligence can problematise differences between humans, artificial intelligence, companies and animals. Artif Intell Law 27(1):73–92 Chesterman S (2020) Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. Int Comp Law Quart 69(4):819–844 Chopra S, Laurence FW (2011) A legal theory for autonomous artificial agents. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor Dennett DC (1988) When philosophers encounter artificial intelligence. Daedalus (cambridge, Mass) 117(1):283–295 Dewey J (1926) The historic background of corporate legal personality. Yale Law J 35(6):655–673 Dodd EM (1948) The evolution of limited liability in American industry: Massachusetts. Harv Law Rev 61(8):1351–1379 Donyets-Kedar R (2017) Challenging corporate personhood theory: reclaiming the public. Law Ethics Human Rights 11(1):61–88 Duschkant A (2015) Legal personhood: how we are getting it wrong. Univ Ill Law Rev 5:2075–2110 Erdelyi OJ, Erdelyi G (2021) The AI liability puzzle and a fund-based work-around. J Artif Intell Res. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12580 European Commission (2020). White Paper On Artificial Intelligence-A European approach to excellence and trust (COM(2020) 65 final). Brussels. (PDF) Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/d2ec4039-c5be-423a-81ef-b9e44e79825b_en?filename=commission-white-paper-artificial-intelligence-feb2020_en.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2023 European Commission (2021). Artificial Intelligence Act. (COM(2021) 206 final). Brussels, 21.4.2021. (PDF) Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0206,10.5.2023 Fleischer H (2010) Supranational corporate forms in the European union: prolegomena to a theory on supranational forms of association. Common Market Law Rev 47(6):1671–1717 Floridi L, Sanders JW (2004) On the morality of artificial agents. Mind Mach 14:349–379 Giuffrida I (2019) Liability for AI decision-making: some legal and ethical considerations. Fordham Law Rev 88(2):439–456 Gordon J-S (2020) What do we owe to intelligent robots? AI Soc 35(1):209–223 Gordon J-S (2021) Artificial moral and legal personhood. AI Soc 36.2:457–471 Gordon J-S (2022) Are superintelligent robots entitled to human rights? Ratio (oxford) 35(3):181–193 Gray JC et al (1997) The nature and sources of the law by John Chipman Gray. Routledge, London & New York Grewal DS (2014) A critical conceptual analysis of definitions of artificial intelligence as applicable to computer engineering. IOSR J Comput Eng 16:9–13 Gunkel DJ, Wales JJ (2021) Debate: what is personhood in the age of AI? AI Soc 36(2):473–486 Hansmann H et al (2006) Law and the rise of the firm. Harv Law Rev 119(5):1333–1403 Hildebrandt M (2016) Law as information in the Era of data-driven agency. Mod Law Rev 79(1):1–30 Hildebrandt M (2018) Algorithmic regulation and the rule of law philosophical transactions of the royal society of London. Ser a: Math Phys Eng Sci 376(2128):20170355 IEEE (2016). Ethically Aligned Design: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems. Version 1, IEEE. Available at: https://standards.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/import/documents/other/ead_v1.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2023 IEEE (2017). Ethically Aligned Design: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. Version 2, IEEE. Available at: https://standards.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/import/documents/other/ead_v2.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2023 IEEE (2021). Raising the Standards in Artificial Intelligence Systems (AIS). IEEE. Available at: https://standards.ieee.org/initiatives/artificial-intelligence-systems/index.html. Accessed 2 April 2021 Jaynes TL (2020) Legal personhood for artificial intelligence: citizenship as the exception to the rule. AI Soc 2020(35):343–354 Jewitt J (2021) Assessing contemporary legislative proposals for their compatibility with a natural law case for AI legal personhood. AI & Soc 36(2):499–508 Kurki VA (2019) A theory of legal personhood. Oxford University Press, Oxford Lai A (2021) Artificial intelligence, LLC: corporate personhood for AI. Mich. St. L. Rev. 2021: 597. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3677360 Laukyte M (2021) The intelligent machine: a new metaphor through which to understand both corporations and AI. AI Soc 36(2):445–456 List C (2021) Group agency and artificial intelligence. Philos Technol 34(4):1213–1242 Machen AW (1911a) Corporate personality (continued). Harv Law Rev 24(5):347–365 Machen AW (1911b) Corporate Personality. Harv Law Rev 24(4):253–267 Martínez E, Winter C (2021) Protecting sentient artificial intelligence: a survey of lay intuitions on standing, personhood, and general legal protection. Front Robot AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.788355 Micklethwait J, Wooldridge A (2003) The company. A short history of a revolutionary idea. The Modern Library, Newyork Mocanu DM (2021) Gradient legal personhood for AI systems-painting continental legal shapes made to fit analytical molds. Front Robot AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.788179 Naffine N (2003) Who are Law’s Persons? From Cheshire cats to responsible subjects. Mod Law Rev 66(3):346–367 Novelli C (2022) Legal personhood for the integration of AI systems in the social context: a study hypothesis. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01384-w Novelli C et al (2022) A conceptual framework for legal personality and its application to AI. Jurisprudence (oxford, England) 13(2):194–219 Pagallo U (2018a) Vital, sophia, and co—the quest for the legal personhood of robots. Information (basel) 9(9):230 Pagallo U (2018b) Apples, oranges, robots four misunderstandings in today’s debate on the legal status of AI systems. Philos Trans R Soc London, Ser A 376(2133):20180168 Parviainen J, Coeckelbergh M (2021) The political choreography of the Sophia robot: beyond robot rights and citizenship to political performances for the social robotics market. AI Soc 36(3):715–724 Penrose R (1990) The emperor’s new mind: concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics. Oxford University Press, Oxford Phillips MJ (1994) Reappraising the real entity theory of the corporation. Fla State Univ Law Rev 2(4):1061–1123 Proudfoot D (2011) Anthropomorphism and AI: Turing’s much misunderstood imitation game. Artif Intell 175:950–957 Raskulla S (2022) European constitution of corporations: legal personhood, legal powers & legal governance of corporate entities in the European union. Tampere University, Tampere Searle JR (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behav Brain Sci 3(3):417–457 Sellwood M (2017) The road to autonomy. San Diego Law Rev 54(4):829 Shevlin H (2021) Non-human consciousness and the specificity problem: a modest theoretical proposal. Mind Lang 36(2):297–314 Smith B (1928) Legal personality. Yale Law J 37(3):283–299 Solaiman SM (2017) Legal personality of robots, corporations, idols and chimpanzees: a quest for legitimacy. Artif Intell Law 25(2):155–179 Solum LB (1992) Legal personhood for artificial intelligence. North Carolina Law Rev 70(4):1231–1287 von Savigny FC (1884) Jural relations; or the roman law of persons as subjects of jural relations. Hyperion Press, Inc, Newyork Wendehorst C (2020) Strict liability for AI and other emerging technologies. J Eur Tort Law 11(2):150–180 Wirtz BW et al (2019) Artificial intelligence and the public sector-applications and challenges. Int J Public Adm 42(7):596–615 Yampolskiy RV (2018) Human indignity from legal AI personhood to selfish memes. arXiv.org. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1810.02724 Zech H (2021) Liability for AI: public policy considerations. ERA-Forum 22(1):147–158 Zevenbergen B et al (2018) Appropriateness and feasibility of legal personhood for AI systems. Hybrid Worlds: Societal and Ethical Challenges: n. pag. Available at: https://clawar.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ICRES2018_p59_paper-17.pdf