Robotics Reference
In-Depth Information
What we will see when robotic law is on the statute topics is described
in a 1985 article by Robert Freitas, Jr., in which he echoes much of
Lehman-Wilzig's thinking of four years earlier:
We will then see an avalanche of cases. We will have robots that
have killed humans, robots that have been killed by humans, robots
who have stolen state secrets, robots who have been stolen; robots
who have taken hostages, robots who have been held hostage and
robots who carry illegal drugs across borders. Cases will occur in
general when robots damage something or someone, or when a
robot is damaged or terminated. In addition, robots will soon enter
our homes as machines to save labor, and as machines to provide
child care and protection. Eventually these entities will become
companions to be loved, defended and protected. [5]
Robots that are damaged or destroyed will raise a variety of complex legal
issues. At present damage to robots will be treated by the courts in the
samewayasdamagetoanyotherproperty. Butjustaslawyerstoday
argue for high compensation awards when the spouse or child of their
client has been killed, in the future lawyers will argue that robots have
an almost priceless value. Admittedly, difficulties arise if we try to apply
existing human laws to robots:
Let us say a human shoots a robot, causing it to malfunction, lose
power, and “die”. But the robot, once “murdered”, is rebuilt as
good as new. If copies of its personality data are in safe storage, then
the repaired machine's mind can be reloaded and up and running in
no time—no harm done and possibly even without memory of the
incident. Does this convert murder into attempted murder? Tem-
porary roboslaughter? Battery? Larceny of time? We will probably
need a new class of felonies or “cruelty to robots” statutes to deal
with this. [5]
Cognisant of the coming need for robotic law, the International Bar As-
sociation, at its 2003 conference in San Francisco, investigated this area
of the law by way of a mock trial. Martine Rothblatt, a Washington,
D.C.-based lawyer, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to pre-
vent a fictitious corporation from disconnecting an intelligent computer.
In the introduction to her account of the mock trial, Rothblatt explains
that
...theissuecouldariseinarealcourtwithinthenextfewdecades,
as computers achieve or exceed the information processing capa-
