User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
  Citation Number 14
 Views 59
 Downloands 12
ROBOTLARIN HUKUKİ VE CEZAİ SORUMLULUĞU ÜZERİNE BİR DENEME
2020
Journal:  
Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
Author:  
Abstract:

Roma hukuku kölelere hak ehliyeti tanımamıştır (D. 4.5.3.1: “Servile caput nullum ius habet”). Söz konusu hukuk sisteminde köleler özgür insanların malvarlığına dâhil olabilen şeyler (res) olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Ancak aynı zamanda insan oldukları için malvarlığına dâhil olabilen diğer şeylerden ayrı tutulmuşlardır. Roma hukukunda kölelerin durumu ayrıntılı incelendiğinde yakın gelecekte hayatımızın bir parçası olacağına inandığımız robotlar ile durumlarının benzerlik gösterdiği görülebilir. Köle bir çeşit kendi kendine düşünebilen, karar verebilen duygusal bir mal olarak tanımlanabilir. Aynı özellikler geleceğimizin robotlarında da görülecektir. Yani robotları hukuki durumları bakımından kölelerin teknolojik akrabaları olarak değerlendirmek mümkündür. Bütün bu bilgiler bizi, eğer robotlar için bir yasal düzenleme yapılacaksa bu düzenlemenin kolaylıkla Roma hukukundan alınabileceği sonucuna götürür. Bu çalışmada robotların ve kölelerin neden aynı statüde değerlendirilebileceğini aydınlatmak adına köle ve robot kavramları hakkında ayrıntılı bilgi verdik. Robot ve yapay zekâ kavramlarını ayrıntılı olarak tanımlayıp inceledikten sonra, kölelerin durumlarını inceleyerek karşılaştırma yaptık ve robotların hukuki sorumluluğunu tartıştık. Ardından yapay zekâyı cezalandırmak başlığı altında robotların cezai sorumluluğunu değerlendirip bu konudaki fikirlerimizi paylaştık.

Keywords:

A test on the law and criminal responsibility of robots
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

The Roman law does not recognize the right to the slave (D. 4.5.3.1: "Servile caput nullum ius habet"). In this legal system, slaves are considered as things that may be included in the property of free people (res). But they are also separated from other things that may include their possessions because they are human. When the situation of slaves in the Roman law is examined in detail, it may appear that the situation of robots that we believe will be part of our lives in the near future is similar to that of robots that we believe will be part of our lives. A kind of slave can be defined as an emotional property that can think of itself, which can decide. The same features will be seen in the future’s robots. So it is possible to consider robots as the technological relatives of the slaves in terms of legal circumstances. All of this information leads us to the conclusion that if a legal arrangement is made for robots, this arrangement can easily be taken from the Roman law. In this study, we provided detailed information about the concepts of slaves and robots in order to explain why robots and slaves can be assessed in the same status. After describing and examining the concepts of robots and artificial intelligence in detail, we compare the situation of slaves and discussed the legal responsibility of robots. Then, under the title Punishing Artificial Intelligence, we assessed the criminal responsibility of robots and shared our ideas on this.

Keywords:

An Essay On Civil and Criminal Liability Of Robots
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

The Roman Law's attitude toward the slave was; "Servile caput nullum ius habet" which means "the slave has no right." In this law system, slaves were regarded as objects which could be the property of another human being. They were legally just "res". But the fact that they were also human beings, slaves differentiated from other objects of property. With the help of their peculium (given by their master) slave could enter into engagements with a third party. When the situation of slaves is examined in Roman Law, it will be seen the situation of robots -there is a consensus about that they will be a part of our lives soon- resembles slaves. A slave could be defined as self-thinking, decision-making, emotional property. The same applies to robots. So robots can be considered as technological relatives of slaves. All this information leads us that if there will be a legal regulation about robots –which should be considered as a must- one can easily adapt the rules from Roman law. In this paper, there is a comparison between robots and slaves by giving information about them. With the help of that comparison, there will be a revival about why their legal status should be similar. Then, there will be brainstorming about how the robot's civil and criminal liability should be regulated.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Attention!
To view citations of publications, you must access Sobiad from a Member University Network. You can contact the Library and Documentation Department for our institution to become a member of Sobiad.
Off-Campus Access
If you are affiliated with a Sobiad Subscriber organization, you can use Login Panel for external access. You can easily sign up and log in with your corporate e-mail address.
Similar Articles








Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

Field :   Hukuk

Journal Type :   Ulusal

Metrics
Article : 860
Cite : 5.473
Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi