PROJECT FOR THE SUBJECT

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

REGULATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

SUBMITTED BY
Yash Gupta

Semester – VIII

B.A.LL.B. (Hons)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Mr. Arnab Bose

Submitted to

Jindal Global Law School

Sonipat, Haryana
Contents Page Number
Declaration 3

Chapter 1- Introduction 4

Statement of problem 5

Mode of writing 5

Mode of citation 5

Chapter 2- AI, Horses and cyber space -

Other governments, another AI regulation -

Chapter 3- Responsibility for AI in reference to various -

laws
Machine learning with Legal text -

Chapter 4- AI Rights -

AI a legal personality? -

A global Code? -

Conclusion- Controlling the creators and the creations -

 DECLARATION

I Yash Gupta declare the work entitled REGULATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,

being submitted to Jindal Global University is original and where the text is
taken from the authenticated books, articles or web articles, appropriate
reference is given. It is true in my best of knowledge.

Date: 8th April 2019

Yash Gupta

Roll No- 20151290

VIII Semester

JGLS

Jindal Global University

 Introduction

The researcher through various academia will to his best knowledge try to provide an answer
for specific questions, Responsibility i.e. If AI were to cause harm, or to create something
that is beneficial, who will be held responsible? a question then arises about the existence of
moral or pragmatic grounds for granting AI legal protection and responsibilities, what about
important decisions that it should be not allowed to take? This question is covered under the
ethics paradigm

The researcher in Chapter 2 will begin with a discernible definition of AI as an

indeterminate definition will lead to semantic and syntactic ambiguity and vagueness that
will lead to complexities in modeling statutory reasoning. How the Nevada state in 2011 for
the purpose of regulating an example of AI i.e. self-driving cars gave a human centric
definition to it and how giving that definition lead to absurdity, this definition was then
repealed in 2013. This example of giving the term AI a human centric definition which then
leads to absurdity is important in understanding that a proper and detailed definition should
be given in legislation for AI before governing it coherently with other laws .This part of the
chapter will also deal with how laws for AI regulation are of utmost importance while
comparing it with the lack of importance that was given in regulating cyberspace when
cybercrime was at its preliminary stage. The final part of this chapter will deal with the legal
personality of AI and how comparing it with the modern legal treatment of animals and their
liabilities, it seems we should apply the same legal principles, but this presumption is wrong.
AI’s legal and moral issues raised by its action are of a different order of complexity than
those of animals. This chapter will also finish with an answer to the question of what it is to
be legally independent.

Chapter 3 will deal with AI and its relationship of legal concepts, cases and statutes, i.e.
private and criminal law and shortcoming of human beings held responsible of humans being
held criminally responsible for AI.
This chapter will also deal with AI and IP, AI and corporate law, AI and competition law.
Machine learning integrated with legal texts will be an important discussion in this chapter
This chapter will end on the answer to the question being discussed in this chapter itself i.e.
the responsibility for AI.
Chapter 4 deal with the final perspective on the question of is there a possibility of AI
coming under the contours of legal personality. Whether we should grant AI this legal
personality? if yes then what would be the pragmatic justifications for the same discussed
with legal rights and responsibilities.
Discussions for a global code with the case studies of ICANN and Space law will help giving
a better perspective on the possible agreement of a global code.
The debate of who should be controlled the creators or the creations will be the concluding
part of this paper.

Statement of problem
Responsibility: If AI were to cause harm or to create something beneficial who should be
held responsible?
Rights: Are there moral or pragmatic grounds for granting AI legal protection and
responsibilities?
Ethics: How should AI make important choices , and are there any decisions it should not be
allowed to take?
Mode of Writing
A descriptive and analytical method of writing has been followed.
Mode of Citation
A uniform mode of Citation has been followed.