Objective

digitallaw

Journal of Digital Technologies and Law

2949-2483

Kazan Innovative University named after V. G. Timiryasov

10.21202/jdtl.2024.42

FNENMX

digitallaw-485

Research Article

ARTICLES

СТАТЬИ

The Rise of AI Avatars: Legal Personhood, Rights and Liabilities in an Evolving Metaverse

Возникновение аватаров на основе искусственного интеллекта: юридическая субъектность, права и обязанности в развивающейся метавселенной

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1026-8292

Чонг

Б. Ч.

Cheong

B. Ch.

Бен Честер Чонг – магистр права (Кембридж), преподаватель права, Школа права; исследователь, Кембриджский центр по изучению управления окружающей средой, энергетикой и природными ресурсами, кафедра экономики землепользования

Сингапур, 599494, г. Сингапур, Клементи Роуд, 463; Великобритания, CB2 3QZ, г. Кембридж, Пемброк Стрит, Девид Аттенборо Билдинг

Scopus Author ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57226145674

WoS Researcher ID: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/3646618

Google Scholar ID: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=bVHXJt0AAAAJ

Ben Chester Cheong – LLM (Cambridge), Law Lecturer, School of Law; Researcher, Cambridge Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance, Department of Land Economy

463 Clementi Road, Singapore 599494; The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, United Kingdom

Scopus Author ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57226145674

WoS Researcher ID: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/3646618

Google Scholar ID: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=bVHXJt0AAAAJ

benchestercheong@suss.edu.sg

Сингапурский университет общественных наук; Кембриджский университетСингапурSingapore University of Social Sciences; University of CambridgeSingapore

2024

28122024

24857885

2024

Чонг Б.Ч.

Cheong B.C.

Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://www.lawjournal.digital/jour/article/view/485

Objective

Objective: to determine the legal implications of the development of autonomous and creative AI-based avatars and to shape the direction of the discourse on the responsible management of AI technologies in the meta-universe based on proactive interdisciplinary approaches.

Methods

Methods: the research is based on a doctrinal legal approach, which allowed presenting a prospective analysis of the legal landscape in the field of AI avatars in the metaverse and to identify four key thematic areas of research: the evolution of AI avatars and the impact of the metaverse, the applicability of legal personhood, the liability for autonomous actions, and the problems of AI avatars in the field of creativity related to intellectual property and privacy.

Results

Results: the paper presents and analyzes predictive scenarios of AI avatars maximizing their influence in the metaverse space. The author notes that the emergence of AI-based avatars in the metaverse raises complex legal, ethical, philosophical and social issues that require urgent solutions. The potential impact of the increasing complexity of AI avatars on legal approaches is considered. As avatars become increasingly autonomous, questions arise about their legal status, rights, responsibilities, risks, and benefits to humans and society. The author analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of giving AI avatars the status of legal entities, as well as applying the concept of distributed responsibility to the consequences of their actions. Special attention is paid to the possible future dominance of super-intelligent AI-based avatars in the metaverse, taking into account the existing risks and needs in the field of governance.

Scientific novelty

Scientific novelty: the article presents a new perspective on the problem of legal personality in the metaverse based on interdisciplinary analysis of the evolution of AI avatars. The research is aimed at achieving a balance between transformational potential and the protection of human rights and welfare through joint efforts. It is proposed to create legal and ethical norms that prioritize the safety and consistency of artificial intelligence technologies involved in the processes occurring in the metaverse.

Practical significance

Practical significance: the conclusions and proposed solutions to the legal problems of personhood and liability can become the basis for revising the concept of legal personality, developing reliable mechanisms of responsibility and accountability, as well as ensuring the protection of human rights and values in the face of increasingly powerful entities based on artificial intelligence. This is associated with the formation and improvement of the legal landscape of process management and overcoming risks in the socially oriented and inclusive ecosystem of the metaverse.

Цель

Цель: определить правовые последствия развития автономных и твор ческих аватаров на основе искусственного интеллекта и сформировать направления дискурса об ответственном управлении техноло гиями искусственного интеллекта в метавселенной на основе активных междисциплинарных подходов.

Методы

Методы: основу исследования составляет доктринальный юридический подход, позволивший представить перспективный анализ правового ландшафта в сфере ИИ-аватаров в метавселенной и определить четыре ключевых тематических направления, по которым проводится исследование: эволюция ИИ-аватаров и влияние метавселенной, применимость правовой субъектности, ответственность за автономные действия и проблемы ИИ-аватаров в сфере творчества, связанные с аспектами интеллектуальной собственности и неприкосновенности частной жизни.

Результаты

Результаты: в работе представлены и проанализированы прогнозные сценарии развития ИИ-аватаров, максимально усиливающих свое влия ние в пространстве метавселенной. Отмечается, что с появлением аватаров на основе искусственного интеллекта в метавселенной связана постановка сложных правовых, этических, философских и социальных вопросов, требующих неотложных решений. Рассмотрено потенциальное влияние растущей сложности ИИ-аватаров на правовые подходы. По мере того как аватары становятся все более автономными, возникают вопросы об их правовом статусе, правах, обязанностях, рисках и пользе для человека и общества. Анализируются преимущества и недостатки наделения ИИ-аватаров правовым статусом юридических лиц, а также применения к последствиям их действий концепции распределенной ответственности. Особое внимание уделено возможному в будущем доминированию сверхразумных аватаров на основе искусственного интеллекта в метавселенной с учетом существующих рисков и потребностей в сфере управления.

Научная новизна

Научная новизна: в статье на примере междисциплинарного анализа эволюции ИИ-аватаров представлен новый взгляд на проблему правосубъектности в метавселенной, направленный на достижение баланса между трансформационным потенциалом и защитой прав и благополучия человека посредством совместных усилий по созданию правовых и этических норм, ставящих во главу угла безопасность и согласованность технологий искусственного интеллекта, задействованных в процессах, происходящих в метавселенной.

Практическая значимость

Практическая значимость: полученные в процессе проведенного исследования выводы и предлагаемые решения правовых проблем субъектности и ответственности могут стать основой для пересмотра концепции правосубъектности, разработки надежных механизмов ответственности и подотчетности, а также обеспечения защиты прав и ценностей человека перед лицом все более мощных сущностей на основе искусственного интеллекта, что сопряжено с формированием и совершенствованием правового ландшафта управления процессами и преодоления рисков в социально ориентированной и инклюзивной экосистеме метавселенной.

большие языковые моделиИИ-аватаринтеллектуальная собственностьискусственный интеллектметавселеннаяответственностьправоправосубъектностьцифровые технологииюридическое лицо

AI avatarartificial intelligencedigital technologiesintellectual propertyLarge language modelslawlegal personlegal personalitymetaverseresponsibility

References1

Abid, A., Farooqi, M., & Zou, J. (2021). Persistent anti-muslim bias in large language models. In Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 298–306). https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462624

Bathaee, Y. (2018). The artificial intelligence black box and the failure of intent and causation. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 31(2), 889–938.

Baum, S. D. (2017). A survey of artificial general intelligence projects for ethics, risk, and policy. Global Catastrophic Risk Institute Working Paper, 17-1. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3070741

Bayoudh, K., Knani, R., Hamdaoui, F., & Mtibaa, A. (2022). A survey on deep multimodal learning for computer vision: Advances, trends, applications, and datasets. The Visual Computer: International Journal of Computer Graphics, 38(8), 2939–2970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-021-02166-7

Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922

Benhamou, Y., & Ferland, J. (2021). Artificial intelligence & damages: Assessing liability and calculating the damages. In G. D’Agostino, A. Gaon, & C. Piovesan, Leading Legal Disruption: Artificial Intelligence and a Toolkit for Lawyers and the Law (pp. 165–197). Monreal: Thomson Reuters – Yvon Blais.

Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan, T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D. M., Wu, J., Winter, C., … Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165

Bryson, J. J., Diamantis, M. E., & Grant, T. D. (2017). Of, for, and by the people: The legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(3), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9214-9

Buiten, M. C. (2019). Towards intelligent regulation of artificial intelligence. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 10(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2019.8

Butcher, J., & Beridze, I. (2019). What is the state of artificial intelligence governance globally? The RUSI Journal, 164(5–6), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2019.1694260

Calo, R. (2015). Robotics and the lessons of cyberlaw. California Law Review, 103(3), 513–563. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2402972

Chatzimichali, A., Harrison, R., & Chrysostomou, D. (2021). Toward privacy-sensitive human–robot interaction: Privacy terms and human–data interaction in the personal robot era. Paladyn Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 12(1), 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2021-0013

Cheong, B. C. (2021). Granting legal personhood to artificial intelligence systems and traditional veil-piercing concepts to impose liability. SN Social Sciences, 1, 231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00236-0

Cheong, B. C. (2022). Avatars in the metaverse: potential legal issues and remedies. International Cybersecurity Law Review, 3, 467–494. https://doi.org/10.1365/s43439-022-00056-9

Chopra, S., & White, L. F. (2011). A legal theory for autonomous artificial agents. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.356801

Cliquet, R., & Avramov, D. (2018). Evolution science and ethics in the third millennium: Challenges and choices for humankind. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73090-5

Craig, C. J., & Kerr, I. R. (2021). The death of the AI author. Ottawa Law Review, 52(1), 31–86. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3374951

Crawford, K., & Calo, R. (2016). There is a blind spot in AI research. Nature, 538(7625), 311–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/538311a

De Gregorio, G. (2021). The rise of digital constitutionalism in the European Union. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 19(1), 41–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moab001.

De Streel, A., Bibal, A., Frénay, B., & Lognoul, M. (2020). Explaining the Black Box: when Law Controls AI. CERRE.

Du Sautoy, M. (2019). The creativity code: Art and innovation in the age of AI. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2sp3dpd

Duan, H., Li, J., Fan, S., Lin, Z., Wu, X., & Cai, W. (2021). Metaverse for social good: A university campus prototype. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (pp. 153–161). https://doi.org/10.1145/3474085.3479238

Eidenmüller, H. (2017). The rise of robots and the law of humans. Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper, 27/2017. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2941001

Elgammal, A. (2019). AI is blurring the definition of artist. American Scientist, 107(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1511/2019.107.1.18

Erdélyi, O. J., & Erdélyi, G. (2021). The AI liability puzzle and a fund-based work-around. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 70, 1309–1334. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1911.08005

Erdélyi, O. J., & Goldsmith, J. (2018). Regulating artificial intelligence: Proposal for a global solution. In Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 95–101). https://doi.org/10.1145/3278721.3278731

Eshraghian, J. K. (2020). Human ownership of artificial creativity. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2(3), 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-0161-x

Everitt, T., Lea, G., & Hutter, M. (2018). AGI safety literature review. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence Survey track (pp. 5441–5449). https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/768

Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., Rossi, F., Schafer, B., Valcke, P., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5

Fosch-Villaronga, E., & Mahler, T. (2021). Cybersecurity, safety and robots: Strengthening the link between cybersecurity and safety in the context of care robots. Computer Law & Security Review, 41, 105528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105528

Garon, J. (2022). Legal Implications of a Ubiquitous Metaverse and a Web3 Future. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4002551

Gellers, J. C. (2021). Rights for robots: Artificial intelligence, animal and environmental law. Routledge.

Gervais, D. J. (2019). The Machine as Author. Iowa Law Review, 105, 2053–2106.

Gervais, D. J. (2020). The machine as author. Iowa Law Review, 105(5), 2053–2106.

Gervais, D. J. (2021). The human cause. Vanderbilt Law Research Paper, 21-39. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3857844

Giuffrida, I. (2019). Liability for AI decision-making: Some legal and ethical considerations. Fordham Law Review, 88(2), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4953916

Glasser, D. (2001). Copyright in computer-generated works: Whom, if anyone, do we reward? Duke Law & Technology Review, 24.

Gordon, J.-S. (2022). Are superintelligent robots entitled to human rights? Ratio, 35(3), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/rati.12346

Green, L., & Le, V. T. (2022). Holding the Line: Responsibility, Digital Citizenship and the Platforms. In: Flew, T., Martin, F.R. (eds) Digital Platform Regulation. Palgrave Global Media Policy and Business. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95220-4_5

Guastavino, M. N., & Mangan, D. (2023). The metaverse matrix of labour law. Italian Labour Law e-Journal. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17138

Gunkel, D. J. (2024). Robot rights. MIT Press. Haney, B. S. (2018). The perils and promises of artificial general intelligence. Journal of Legislation, 45(2), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3261254

Hassani, H., Huang, X., & Silva, E. (2021). The human digitalisation journey: Technology first at the expense of humans? Information, 12(7), 267. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12070267

Hedrick, A. S. (2019). I “think,” therefore I create: Claiming copyright in the outputs of algorithms. Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, 8(2), 324–374.

Hertzmann, A. (2018). Can computers create art? Arts, 7(2), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts7020018

Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (Eds.). (2006). Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice. MIT Press.

Hildebrandt, M. (2020). Legal personhood for AI? In Law for Computer Scientists and Other Folk (pp. 237–250). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198860877.003.0009

Hristov, K. (2017). Artificial intelligence and the copyright dilemma. IDEA: The Journal of the Franklin Pierce for Intellectual Property, 57(3), 431–454.

Kamrowska-Załuska, D. (2021). Impact of AI-based tools and urban big data analytics on the design and planning of cities. Land, 10(11), 1209. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10111209

Kim, J., & Im, I. (2023). Anthropomorphic response: Understanding interactions between humans and artificial intelligence agents. Computers in Human Behavior, 139, 107512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107512

Kop, M. (2020). AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an articulated public domain. Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, 28(1), 297–336. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3409715

Kostenko, O., Furashev, V., Zhuravlov, D., & Dniprov, O. (2022). Genesis of Legal Regulation Web and the Model of the Electronic Jurisdiction of the Metaverse. Bratislava Law Review, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2022.6.2.316

Kostenko, O., Zhuravlov, D., Dniprov, O., & Korotiuk, O. (2023). Metaverse: Model Criminal Code. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 9(4), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2023-9-4-134-147

Kurki, V. A. J. (2019). A theory of legal personhood. Oxford University Press.

Kuzminykh, A., & Rintel, S. (2020). Classification of functional attention in video meetings. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–13). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376546

Lehdonvirta, V. (2024). Cloud empires: How digital platforms are overtaking the state and how we can regain control. MIT Press.

Lemley, M. A., & Casey, B. (2019). Remedies for robots. University of Chicago Law Review, 86, 1311. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3223621

Lessig, L. (2004). Free culture: How big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity. Penguin Press.

Mäntymäki, M., Minkkinen, M., Birkstedt, T., & Viljanen, M. (2022). Defining organizational AI governance. AI and Ethics, 2(1), 603–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00143-x

Marchant, G. E., & Lindor, R. A. (2012). The coming collision between autonomous vehicles and the liability system. Santa Clara Law Review, 52(4), 1321–1340.

McStay, A. (2023). The Metaverse: Surveillant Physics, Virtual Realist Governance, and the Missing Commons. Philosophy & Technology, 36, 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00613-y

Militsyna, K. (2022). Legal personhood for artificial intelligence: Pro, contra, abstain? Teisė, 122(1), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.15388/teise.2022.122.10

Miller, A. I. (2020). The artist in the machine: The world of AI-powered creativity. MIT Press

Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679

Mohseni, S., Wang, H., Yu, Z., Xiao, C., Wang, Z., & Yadawa, J. (2021). Taxonomy of machine learning safety: A survey and primer. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2106.04823

Moore, J. (2019). AI for not bad. Frontiers in Big Data, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2019.00032

Nordmoen, J., Veenstra, F., Ellefsen, K. O., & Glette, K. (2021). MAP-Elites enables powerful stepping stones and diversity for modular robotics. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8, 639173. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.639173

Pagallo, U. (2018). Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The quest for the legal personhood of robots. Information, 9(9), 230. https://doi.org/10.3390/info9090230

Parra Pennefather, P. (2023). AI and the Future of Creative Work. In Creative Prototyping with Generative AI. Design Thinking (pp. 387–410). Apress, Berkeley, CA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-9579-3_13

Qin, H. X., Wang, Y., & Hui, P. (2022). Identity, Crimes, and Law Enforcement in the Metaverse. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2210.06134

Rachum-Twaig, O. (2020). Whose robot is it anyway?: Liability for artificial-intelligence-based robots. University of Illinois Law Review, 2020(4), 1141–1175.

Ramesh, A., Pavlov, M., Goh, G., Gray, S., Voss, C., Radford, A., Chen, M., & Sutskever, I. (2021). Zero-shot textto-image generation. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2102.12092

Russell, S. (2023). Human compatible: AI and the problem of control. Penguin. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson.

Samek, W., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., Anders, C. J., & Müller, K.-R. (2021). Explaining deep neural networks and beyond: A review of methods and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 109(3), 247–278. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2021.3060483

Schafer, B., Komuves, D., Zatarain, J. M. N., & Diver, L. (2015). A fourth law of robotics? Copyright and the law and ethics of machine co-production. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 23(3), 217–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-015-9169-7

Scherer, M. U. (2016). Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 29(2), 353–400. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2609777

Selbst, A. D. (2020). Negligence and AI’s human users. Boston University Law Review, 100(4), 1315–1376.

Seymour, M., Riemer, K., & Kay, J. (2018). Actors, avatars and agents: Potentials and implications of natural face technology for the creation of realistic visual presence. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(10). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00515

Shirado, H., & Christakis, N. A. (2017). Locally noisy autonomous agents improve global human coordination in network experiments. Nature, 545(7654), 370–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22332

Soares, N., & Fallenstein, B. (2017). Agent foundations for aligning machine intelligence with human interests: a technical research agenda. In V. Callaghan, J. Miller, R. Yampolskiy, & S. Armstrong (Eds.), The Technological Singularity (pp. 103–125). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54033-6_5

Solaiman, S. M. (2017). Legal personality of robots, corporations, idols and chimpanzees: A quest for legitimacy. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(2), 155–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-016-9192-3

Soliman, M. M., Ahmed, E., Darwish, A., & Hassanien, A. E. (2024). Artificial intelligence powered Metaverse: Analysis, challenges and future perspectives. Artificial Intelligence Review, 57, 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-023-10641-x

Sotala, K., & Yampolskiy, R. V. (2015). Responses to catastrophic AGI risk: a survey. Physica Scripta, 90(1), 018001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/90/1/018001

Srinivasan, R., & Parikh, D. (2021). Building bridges: Generative artworks to explore AI ethics. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2106.13901

Stein, A. L. (2020). Artificial intelligence and climate change. Yale Journal on Regulation, 37, 890–939.

Stix, C., & Maas, M. M. (2021). Bridging the gap: The case for an ‘Incompletely Theorized Agreement’ on AI policy. AI and Ethics, 1(3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00037-w

Sun, J., Gan, W., Chao, H.-C., & Yu, P. S. (2022). Metaverse: Survey, Applications, Security, and Opportunities. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2210.07990

Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). How AI can be a force for good. Science, 361(6404), 751–752. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat5991

Tai, E. T. T. (2018). Liability for (semi)autonomous systems: Robots and algorithms. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3161962

Tegmark, M. (2017). Life 3.0: Being human in the age of artificial intelligence. Allen Lane.

Tolmeijer, S., Kneer, M., Sarasua, C., Christen, M., & Bernstein, A. (2020). Implementations in machine ethics: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 53(6), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419633

Travis, H. (2020). Intelligent entertainment: Shaping policies on the algorithmic generation and regulation of creative works. FIU Law Review, 14, 179–199. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3726755

Turchin, A., & Denkenberger, D. (2020). Classification of global catastrophic risks connected with artificial intelligence. AI & Society, 35(1), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-018-0845-5

Turner, C., & Schneider, S. (2020). Could you merge with AI? Reflections on the singularity and radical brain enhancement. In M. D. Dubber, F. Pasquale, & S. Das (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of ethics of AI (pp. 307–324). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190067397.013.19

Turner, J. (2019). Robot rules: Regulating artificial intelligence. Palgrave Macmillan.

Tyagi, K. (2023). Deepfakes, copyright and personality rights: An inter-disciplinary perspective. In K. Mathis & A. Tor (Eds.), Law and economics of the digital transformation. ILEC 2023. Economic analysis of law in European legal scholarship (Vol. 15, pp. 191–210). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25059-0_9

van den Hoven van Genderen, R. (2018). Do we need new legal personhood in the age of robots and AI? In Perspectives in Law, Business and Innovation (pp. 185–206). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2874-9_2

Vladeck, D. C. (2014). Machines without principals: Liability rules and artificial intelligence. Washington Law Review, 89(1), 117–150.

100

Wallach, W., & Marchant, G. E. (2019). Toward the agile and comprehensive international governance of AI and robotics. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3), 505–508. https://doi.org/10.1109/jproc.2019.2899422

101

Wolfert, P., Robinson, N., & Belpaeme, T. (2022). A review of evaluation practices of gesture generation in embodied conversational agents. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 52(3), 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2022.3149173

102

Wu, H., & Zhang, W. (2023). Digital identity, privacy security, and their legal safeguards in the Metaverse. Security and Safety, 2, 2023011. https://doi.org/10.1051/sands/2023011

103

Yanisky-Ravid, S., & Velez-Hernandez, L. A. (2018). Copyrightability of artworks produced by creative robots, driven by artificial intelligence systems and the concept of originality: The formality-objective model. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 19(1), 1–53. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2943778

104

Yayman, D. (2023). Taxation in Virtual Worlds: Analysis Under United States of America and Turkish Tax Regulations. Sosyoekonomi, 31(55), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.01.11

105

Zimmermann, D., Wehler, A., & Kaspar, K. (2023). Self-representation through avatars in digital environments. Current Psychology, 42, 21775-21789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03232-6

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.