Robots as Products: The Case for a Realistic Analysis of Robotic Applications and Liability Rules

Abstract

The term robot is a-technical and the applications which are normally referred to with it are extremely diverse from one another. Distinguishing criteria relevant for a legal analysis need thus be identified: and the ability of the machine to learn are taken into account.Once narrowly defined though, only a notion of strong autonomy justifies a complete shift in the paradigms for the ascription of liability. Yet machines showing such trait belong – at least so far – to science fiction, and should be disregarded. Robots instead are products and applicable rules present a sufficient degree of elasticity to accommodate existing as well as reasonably foreseeable applications.Instead other criteria such as the desirability of a given technology – from a public policy or constitutional law perspective – as well as its potential market may induce to consider that the incentives currently provided are not optimal; thus the argument is made that such – non merely technical-aspects need to be taken into account when deciding if and how to devise alternative compensation mechanisms.