Artificial Intelligence as Global Commons and the “International Law Supremacy” Principle
Open accessAbstract
The current paper analyzes the issue of Artificial Intelligence-AI-focusing on Artificial General Intelligence-AGI-and Artificial Super Intelligence-ASI-from the perspective of international law.It begins with the acknowledgment of the fact that AI poses historically unique challenges on the basis of its ontological characteristics and mainly of the emerging autonomy.Its autonomy bears the potential of leading to actual personhood-or raising AI entities to the status of "being"-thus necessitating the attribution of legal personhood too.Such a situation would be groundbreaking for all legal systems as well as for the way we comprehend various conducts, terms and legal relationships.In this framework, of the ecumenical challenges that AI poses, the article argues in favor of a common, international response, through the international law supremacy principle.In addition to that, the article makes the argument for the regulation of AI entities that lie at an intermediate technological phase, meaning for those which have surpassed the level of "res", without constituting fully autonomous "beings" yet and thus raising the issue of the attribution of legal personhood, that the regulatory framework of global commons could be adopted, both for the entities themselves, as well as for their creations.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
An AI for all would require establishing AI commons, and a similar attempt has been made to establish digital commons.
“An AI for all would require establishing AI commons [201] and a similar attempt has been previously made to establish digital commons [202].”
From The sustainability of artificial intelligence: an urbanistic viewpoint from the lens of smart and sustainable cities (2020) · cites this paper as [201]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Artificial intelligence: A modern approach
Nilsson, N. J. (1996) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(96)00007-0 · Cited by 10,726 · see citing works
Regulating Artificial Intelligence Systems: Risks, Challenges, Competencies, and Strategies
Scherer, M. U. (2015) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2609777 · Cited by 563 · see citing works
Our final invention: artificial intelligence and the end of the human era
(2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-6133 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Law's Territory (A History of Jurisdiction)
Ford, R. T. (1999) · Michigan Law Review · doi:10.2307/1290376 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligences
Solum, L. B. (2020) · Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics · doi:10.4324/9781003074991-37 · Cited by 296 · see citing works
Legal Implications of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind
Joyner, C. C. (1986) · International and Comparative Law Quarterly · doi:10.1093/iclqaj/35.1.190 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Losing Humanity The Case against Killer Robots
Allenby, B. R. (2016) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315241364-20 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Learning to Protect Communications with Adversarial Neural Cryptography
Abadi, M., & Andersen, D. G. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1610.06918 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
The Legal Personhood of Artificial Intelligences
Kurki, V. (2019) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198844037.003.0007 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
How We’re Predicting AI – or Failing to
Armstrong, S., & Sotala, K. (2014) · Topics in intelligent engineering and informatics · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09668-1_2 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence: Robots, Avatars and the Demise of the Human Mediator
Larson, D. A. (2010) · The Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University) · Cited by 49 · see citing works
EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE IN CYBERSPACE? BODIN, SCHMITT, GROTIUS IN CYBERSPACE
Hildebrandt, M. (2013) · University of Toronto Law Journal · doi:10.3138/utlj.1119 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
The Foreseeability of Human–Artificial Intelligence Interactions *
Kowert, W. (2017) · Texas law review · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Schuller, A. L. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Dowell, R. (2018) · Minnesota journal of law science & technology · doi:10.24926/15529541.3798 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
The T ragedy of the Global Commons
Clancy, E. A. (1998) · Indiana Magazine of History (Indiana University) · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Manhattan_Project.exe: A Nuclear Option for the Digital Age
Laton, D. (2017) · Scholarship at Catholic Law (Catholic University of America) · Cited by 19 · see citing works
What Is Artificial Intelligence?
Bowman, C. F. (2022) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781003143437-9 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
A Simpler World? On Pruning Risks and Harvesting Fruits in an Orchard of Whispering AlgorithmsPreprint
Cuullar, M.-F. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3044720 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Clancy, Erin. 1998. "The Tragedy of the Global Commons." Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 5(2): 601-19.
- Connolly, William. 1995. The Ethos of Pluralization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Kroll, Joshua et al. 2017. "Accountable Algorithms." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 165:633-705.
- Lin, Herbert 2017. "Will Artificially Intelligent Weapons kill the Laws of War?" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September 18. https://thebulletin.org/will-artificially-intelligent-weapons-kill-laws-war11124.
- Marra, William & Sarah McNeil. 2013. "Understanding "The Loop": Regulating the Next Generation of War Machines." Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 36: 1139-87.
- Schmitt, Michael N. & Jeffrey Thurnher. 2013. "Out of the Loop: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict." Harvard National Security Journal 4: 231-81.
- Watson, Bridget. 2018. "A Mind of its Own-Direct Infringement by Users of Artificial intelligence Systems". IDEA: The Law Review of the Franklin Pierce Center for Intellectual Property 58(1): 65-93.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Yigitcanlar, T., & Cugurullo, F. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12208548 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tzimas, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Macedonia (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Tzimas, Themistoklis
- ORCID
- Tzimas, Themistoklis
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 10th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities (RAIS 2018)
- Publisher
- Atlantis Press
- Published
- 2018
- OpenAlex
- W2909864494
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 20.74
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities (RAIS) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Literary and Philosophical Studies
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, artificial general intelligence, superintelligence, legal personality, AI autonomy, global commons, AI regulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
