AI跨边界风险加剧,现有法律追责机制难应对,需全球协同责任设计。
Unbounded Harms, Bounded Law: Liability in the Age of Borderless AI
- 借鉴疫苗、金融、核能等领域的责任制度,提炼可迁移的法律设计原则。
- 指出当前地域性法律体系难以覆盖跨国AI风险,责任追溯存在结构性缺陷。
- 适合关注AI治理、国际法与科技政策的研究者与政策制定者阅读。
人工智能的快速普及暴露出风险治理的重大缺陷。尽管事前风险识别与预防有所进展,但负责任AI研究在事后责任分配、责任归属和补救有效性方面仍严重不足,尤其针对跨境危害和超越国界的风险。基于当代人工智能风险分析,本文认为这些危害在全局人工智能供应链中具有结构性特征,且由于跨国部署、数据基础设施以及各国监管能力不均,其发生频率与严重性可能持续上升。因此,以领土为基础的责任制度日益失效。本文采用比较与跨学科方法,考察疫苗伤害补偿、系统性金融风险治理、商业核责任及国际环境制度等高风险跨国领域的赔偿与责任框架,提炼出严格责任、风险共担、集体分摊与责任传导等可转移的法律设计原则,并指出其在应用于AI相关危害时的潜在结构限制。在以人工智能军备竞赛为主导而非合作治理的国际秩序下,本文勾勒出全球AI问责与补偿架构的轮廓,强调地缘政治竞争与有效治理跨境AI风险所需的集体行动之间的张力。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) has exposed significant deficiencies in risk governance. While ex-ante harm identification and prevention have advanced, Responsible AI scholarship remains underdeveloped in addressing ex-post liability. Core legal questions regarding liability allocation, responsibility attribution, and remedial effectiveness remain insufficiently theorized and institutionalized, particularly for transboundary harms and risks that transcend national jurisdictions. Drawing on contemporary AI risk analyses, we argue that such harms are structurally embedded in global AI supply chains and are likely to escalate in frequency and severity due to cross-border deployment, data infrastructures, and uneven national oversight capacities. Consequently, territorially bounded liability regimes are increasingly inadequate. Using a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, this paper examines compensation and liability frameworks from high-risk transnational domains - including vaccine injury schemes, systemic financial risk governance, commercial nuclear liability, and international environmental regimes - to distill transferable legal design principles such as strict liability, risk pooling, collective risk-sharing, and liability channelling, while highlighting potential structural constraints on their application to AI-related harms. Situated within an international order shaped more by AI arms race dynamics than cooperative governance, the paper outlines the contours of a global AI accountability and compensation architecture, emphasizing the tension between geopolitical rivalry and the collective action required to govern transboundary AI risks effectively.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。