Objective: to explore the evolution and comparative effectiveness of mutual legal assistance as a practical alternative to universal jurisdiction in the context of countering transnational cybercrime based on the provisions of the UN Cybercrime Convention.

Methods: the paper employs the method of in-depth legal analysis of international legal tools with an emphasis on the provisions of the United Nations Cybercrime Convention. The author has conducted a comparative legal study of the mechanisms of universal jurisdiction and mutual legal assistance, including the study of historical precedents of the application of universal jurisdiction and the evolution of the mutual legal assistance concept within common law, bilateral and multilateral international agreements. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the Hague Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance as a model for organizing international cooperation. The research relies on doctrinal developments and practical results of the application of the legal mechanisms under consideration in the fight against digital threats.

Results: the analysis demonstrated that, despite the humanitarian potential of universal jurisdiction, which allows national courts to carry out extraterritorial prosecution of serious crimes, its practical application is significantly hampered by opposition from sovereign states and selective law enforcement under political influence. An effective consensual alternative is the mechanism of mutual legal assistance, which promotes international judicial cooperation and ensures coordinated counteraction to cross-border cybercrime while preserving national sovereignty. The author shows that the UN Cybercrime Convention effectively integrates the mutual legal assistance principles through consultations, coordination of jurisdictions, extradition, and transfer of convicted persons and criminal proceedings.

Scientific novelty: the study offers an innovative approach to analyzing the relationship between traditional and modern international legal mechanisms under the global digitalization. The author substantiates the conceptual position according to which the mutual legal assistance, conditioned by both common law practice and modern contractual initiatives, represents a unique comprehensive toolkit that allows overcoming the systemic limitations of universal jurisdiction in the digital age. The research demonstrated that mutual legal assistance de facto creates a consensual practice of applying universal jurisdiction based on the voluntary consent of states, which qualitatively distinguishes it from traditional approaches. For the first time, the implementation of the mutual legal assistance principles in a specialized international treaty on cybercrime was systematically analyzed.

Practical significance: the results obtained highlight the critical role of mutual legal assistance in strengthening global judicial cooperation and effectively curbing transnational cybercrime. The study demonstrates the practical effectiveness of the UN Cybercrime Convention as an effective international legal tool that ensures a balance between the sovereignty of states and the need for international judicial cooperation.

Objective: to critically analyze the possibility of extending the existing spatial criminal law principles to acts committed in the decentralized virtual worlds of the metaverse, and to develop proposals that include updating the approach to establishing jurisdiction over such virtual crimes.

Methods: the methodological basis of the research is a set of general scientific methods and approaches of scientific cognition – dialectical, formal logical (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction), systematic, as well as private scientific methods – formal legal, legal modeling, interpretation. The study relies on an analysis of judicial practice, foreign legislation, technical features of blockchain technologies and decentralized autonomous organizations, which makes it possible to identify gaps in legal regulation and propose conceptually new solutions for determining the crime scene in a virtual environment.

Results: the study revealed a limited implementation of the current generally accepted principles of determining jurisdiction in relation to virtual crimes that do not have physical coordinates. The proposed multifactorial jurisdiction model redefines the “crime scene” taking into account factors such as the offender’s digital identity, the nature and location of digital assets, platform management protocols, and the actual damage caused. Assumingly, the immutable and verifiable nature of blockchain transactions can serve as a legal equivalent of a physical presence to establish personal jurisdiction, allowing criminal prosecution to be initiated even in cases where the actual location of the offender remains unknown.

Scientific novelty: the paper presents an approach that implies the fundamental transformation of reactive, adaptive legal regulation principles into a proactive, comprehensive framework designed specifically for the unique challenges of the metaverse. A paradigm-changing hypothesis was put forward: that a permanent (stable) digital footprint of the offender in virtual spaces can serve to exercise jurisdiction. The model systematically presents the idea of harm as the most important link between virtual offenses and their consequences in the real world.

Practical significance: it is currently impossible to apply legal norms and rules to relations in the metaverse, taking into account their specifics. The main provisions and conclusions of the study can be used to improve the mechanisms of legal regulation of the metaverse and to form international protocols on data exchange and mutual legal assistance for searching and collecting evidence based on blockchain technology. They may help to develop legislative initiatives aimed at creating integrated legal mechanisms that are scalable and resistant to rapid technological changes, characteristic for the digital environment.

Objective: to conduct a comparative analysis of the judicial interpretation of the fair dealing and fair use doctrines in the copyright law systems of India, the United States and the European Union in the context of the challenges posed by the development of generative artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies.

Methods: the work uses a set of scientific methods, including a comparative legal analysis of the legislation of three jurisdictions, a systematic analysis of judicial practice in India, a dogmatic method of interpreting regulations, as well as a structural and functional approach to the study of legal institutions. Special attention was paid to over sixty years of Indian judicial practice in applying the fair dealing doctrine, to the American fair use doctrine with its four-factor test, and to the European system of legislative exceptions in text and data mining. The research methodology includes a historical and legal method for identifying evolutionary trends in the judicial interpretation of copyright exceptions, a formal legal method for analyzing the normative content of legal institutions, and a legal modeling method for developing recommendations to improve legislation for regulation of generative artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies.

Results: the study convincingly demonstrates the structural inconsistency of the Indian closed-list system of copyright exclusions for regulating generative artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies. It was established that the Indian fair dealing doctrine is characterized by five fundamental limitations: excessively literal interpretation of the legislative text, lack of a transformative use concept, inability to adapt to digital formats, legal gap in the regulation of the artificial intelligence outputs, and significantly limited application. A comparative analysis revealed that the American system reaches structural limits when regulating the large-scale use of data, whereas the European model covers the data input but not the commercialization of artificial intelligence outputs.

Scientific novelty: the research presents a comprehensive comparative legal analysis of the application of the fair dealing and fair use doctrines to generative artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies. The study systematizes more than sixty years of judicial practice in three legal systems, which allowed identifying the structural limitations of both open and closed models of copyright exceptions and justifying the need to comprehensively regulate full cycle of the creation and commercialization of artificial intelligence content.

Practical significance: the results can be used to develop national strategies for regulating artificial intelligence; reform the system of copyright exceptions; introduce technologically neutral standards for text and data mining; create disclosure mechanisms for training datasets and registers of copyright holders’ opt-outs; and modernize the system of collective rights management using blockchain.

Objective: to determine the place of digital phonograms, videograms and videophonograms in the system of electronic evidence in Russian judicial proceedings, to form a unified conceptual framework and classification system to ensure effective use in procedural practice.

Methods: the research is based on the universal dialectical method of cognition, general scientific methods (description, comparison, generalization, modeling, analysis, synthesis), and specific scientific methods. Special attention was paid to the system-structural analysis of regulatory legal acts, state standards in the field of information technology, and international documents regulating work with digital evidence. The author applied methods of criminalistic research, a formal legal method of interpreting procedural norms, and a comparative analysis of foreign experience in regulating electronic evidence.

Results: the study identified and systematized the key reasons for the legal uncertainty of electronic evidence: a variety of representation forms, high data vulnerability, insufficient competence of the proving subjects, and inconsistency with traditional methods of evidence recording. The author developed an original classification of electronic evidence and digital phonograms, videograms, and videophonograms, using criteria such as the form of data presentation, recording method, and nature of information media. Universal definitions of the basic concepts are formulated: electronic evidence, digital evidence, digital phonogram, videophonogram, data carriers, a copy of digital evidence. The necessity is substantiated to harmonize procedural norms based on state standards of information technologies and international experience.

Scientific novelty: for the first time, a comprehensive methodology was developed to form the conceptual apparatus and classification of electronic evidence, integrating state standards on information technology with criminalistic and procedural aspects of evidence recording. Universal terms and definitions were introduced, which had been absent in the current Russian legislation. They were adapted for all types of legal proceedings, taking into account the specifics of the digital environment. A typical model of working with digital evidence was proposed, with identification, collection, receipt, preservation, analysis and presentation stages. The category of digital phonograms, videograms and videophonograms was proved to be a subtype of electronic discrete digital evidence.

Practical significance: the results can be used to improve procedural legislation regarding the regulation of work with electronic evidence. They can help to develop departmental instructions and practical recommendations for investigators, specialists and experts on the identification, collection, fixation, verification and evaluation of digital evidence. The proposed classification and conceptual framework contribute to the unification of approaches to the procedural design of electronic evidence. The result is minimizing procedural errors, increasing the competence of the proving subjects, and ensuring the admissibility and reliability of digital phonograms, videograms and videophonograms. The research materials are applicable in the training of lawyers, investigators, and forensic experts specializing in digital forensics

Objective: to study the “right to explanation” in the context of the PEEC doctrine (public interest, environmental sustainability, economic development, criminal justice) in order to develop key performance indicators reflecting the socio-cultural characteristics of different countries and ensuring adaptability, transparency and cultural relevance in the regulation of explainable artificial intelligence.

Methods: the research uses a unique methodological approach that combines the iterative processes of soft systems methodology with a theoretical framework based on the PEEC principles. Such integration makes it possible to comprehensively study the social, economic, political and legal regimes of the ‘G20 Giants’ – the United States of America, the Federal Republic of Germany, Japan, the Republic of India, the Federal Republic of Brazil and the Russian Federation – when designing key performance indicators. The proposed key performance indicators are applicable to assess the transparency and accountability of artificial intelligence systems, simplifying data collection and practical implementation in various cultural contexts. The developed model corresponds to the actual social needs in decision-making using artificial intelligence technologies.

Results: the study proposes a new legal model for regulating explainable artificial intelligence based on a system of key performance indicators. In addition to eliminating the problems of regulating explainable artificial intelligence in various cultural, ethical and legal fields, this model ensures that the system of regulating explainable artificial intelligence properly takes into account anthropocentric aspects, since it is focused on unlocking the true potential of artificial intelligence. The proposed approach promotes the most effective use of artificial intelligence technologies for the benefit of society in the perspective of sustainable development.

Scientific novelty: the work applies a unique scientific approach that takes into account cultural, ethical, socio-economic and legal differences when developing a legal framework for regulating explainable artificial intelligence. This allows adapting the legal framework to various national conditions, while contributing to responsible management of artificial intelligence with a check-and-balance system.

Practical significance: the results obtained make it possible to use the proposed legal model in the practical activities of government agencies and developers of artificial intelligence systems to ensure transparency and explainability of technologies. Effective adjustment of the proposed key performance indicators, taking into account the specifics of states, will optimize them for universal use. Although all five key performance indicators are relevant for the ‘G20 Giants’, their relative significance depends on the socio-cultural and legal conditions of a particular state. Further research should cover a wider range of issues, including other developed and developing countries, in order to adapt the regulation of explainable artificial intelligence to various national and global requirements.

Objective: to critically assess the ethical issues related to the use of artificial intelligence in the development of intellectual property objects, with an emphasis on the problems of authorship, ownership, originality and responsibility.

Methods: the research uses a comprehensive analysis of the existing regulatory framework and case law in the field of intellectual property and artificial intelligence. A systematic review of the scientific literature includes publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals and analytical reports on the ethical aspects of the use of artificial intelligence, legislation in the field of intellectual property and the transformation of the digital landscape. The author provides a critical synthesis of scientific arguments and theoretical discussions regarding the ethical status of artificial intelligence as an author and co-author of creative works. The study assesses artificial intelligence systems through the prism of fairness, accountability and transparency concepts.

Results: the lack of legal recognition of artificial intelligence as an author or inventor was revealed in most legal systems worldwide; the intellectual property paradigm is still based on human-centered ideas about creativity and invention, which creates a regulatory gap. The study established significant ambiguity in the fields of ownership and accountability, since artificial intelligence, without legal personality, creates an ethical problem: should the intellectual property created by an autonomous system belong to the developer, user, data provider or remain in the public domain. The author identified the risks of bias and exploitation in creative industries where artificial intelligence is trained using copyrighted materials without permission or compensation to their creators. There has been a shift towards double ethical standards due to jurisdictional and sector differences in relation to works created using artificial intelligence. This promotes unfair global differences in the protection of intellectual property rights.

Scientific novelty: the author presented a multifaceted interdisciplinary analysis that integrates the legal, ethical and technological fields of research on intellectual property created using artificial intelligence. The developed conceptual framework may help to comprehensively solve the ethical and regulatory issues arising in connection with works created with the participation of artificial intelligence, including the justification of the need for legal reform, taking into account the ethical imperatives of modern technological development.

Practical significance: The study contains ethically grounded recommendations for legislators, legal practitioners, and technology developers to amend intellectual property legislation to effectively address issues of authorship, ownership, and accountability in relation to works created using artificial intelligence. The recommendations may ensure a balance between stimulating innovations and protecting the rights of a human author.

Objective: to provide a comprehensive legal and economic analysis of the validity of robot taxation as a measure to protect the labor market under the increasing automation, taking into account the socio-economic realities of Nigeria’s developing economy.

Methods: the research is based on doctrinal and comparative legal methodology. The author systematically analyzed scientific publications, legislative acts, statistical data and empirical materials related to the impact of robotics and artificial intelligence on global labor markets. Special attention was paid to studying tax policy in the field of automation in South Korea and the European Union, in order to identify universal patterns and specific features of automation regulation in various jurisdictions. Methodological tools include content analysis of regulatory documents, economic and statistical analysis of data from international organizations, and a critical analysis of doctrinal provisions regarding the prospects for robot taxation.

Results: the research demonstrates the ambiguity of the robot taxation institute in the modern legal and economic system. It was found that the robot taxation may slow down the pace of automation, provide workers with time to adapt and retrain, compensate for the reduction in income tax revenues and ensure economic equity by redistributing corporate income from automation. At the same time, significant limitations of this concept were identified: the risk of inhibiting innovation, the lack of a unified legal definition of the “robot”, the threat of capital outflow and the shift of production to jurisdictions with a more favorable tax environment. In relation to Nigeria, the conclusion is that a robot tax is premature due to low automation, high structural unemployment, the dominance of the informal employment sector, and poor digital infrastructure.

Scientific novelty: the work is a systematic study of the legal and economic aspects of robot taxation in the Nigerian legal system. The study is novel as it substantiates a contextual approach to determining the feasibility of a robot tax, taking into account the stage of economic development, the structure of the labor market and the degree of penetration of automation technologies. For the first time, the author formulates the concept of responsible automation for developing economies, which implies not punitive taxation, but a system of incentives combining moderate fees with investments in human capital and digital infrastructure.

Practical significance: the research results are valuable for forming state policy in the field of labor automation regulation. The proposed recommendations include the reform of corporate tax codes taking into account responsible automation, the introduction of mandatory assessment of the impact of automation on employment, the creation of a system of tax incentives for companies retraining workers displaced by technology, and the formation of a multilateral platform for ethical automation management. They can be used by the legislative and executive authorities of Nigeria and other developing countries to create legal mechanisms for regulating the digital economy and protecting workers’ rights under the technological transformation.