Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  algorithmic contracts
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Umowy algorytmiczne stanowią kolejną kategorię umów wzbogaconych cyfrowo, które coraz częściej zawierane są w praktyce obrotu. Ich istota sprowadza się do określania przez algorytm treści zobowiązania stron, przy czym algorytm ten działać może jako ,,negocjator”, bądź uzupełniać luki w treści wcześniej ustalonych warunków umownych. Specyfika tych umów ma swoje prawnie doniosłe konsekwencje i rodzi konieczność poszukiwania odpowiedzi na wiele pytań, tj. m.in. czy algorytm może stworzyć treść umowy i czy będzie ona prawnie wiążąca, czy będzie można powołać się na błąd oświadczenia woli, gdy system zawiedzie lub algorytm źle przeanalizuje dane, co w sytuacji, gdy treść oświadczenia ,,złożonego przez algorytm” nie odpowiadała zamiarowi osoby posługującej się algorytmem? Celem artykułu będzie udzielenie odpowiedzi na powyższe pytania przy uwzględnieniu wybranych aktów prawa modelowego i – niejako pobocznie – ocena znaczenia tychże aktów dla praktyki obrotu i szerzej prawa umów.
EN
Algorithmic contracts are another category of digitally enriched contracts that are increasingly common in commercial practice. Their essence boils down to the determination by an algorithm of the content of the parties’ obligation, whereby the algorithm may act as a ‘negotiator’ or fill in gaps in the content of pre-established contractual terms. The specificity of these contracts has legally significant consequences and raises a number of questions, e.g. whether an algorithm can create the content of a contract and whether it will be legally binding, whether it will be possible to claim a declaration of intent error when the system fails or the algorithm misanalyses data, what if the content of a statement ‘made by an algorithm’ did not match the intention of the person using the algorithm? The purpose of this article will be to answer the above questions by taking into account selected model acts and – as a side note, as it were – to assess the relevance of these acts for the practice of trading and contract law more broadly.
EN
The article comprises an analysis of legal implications linked with the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the economy. The current rules of civil law are often inadequate to address the consequences of actions taken by AI systems, as they fail to determine who is liable and on what legal basis. The essence of the problem is that AI’s decisions are autonomous. Vesting AI with legal personality would not suffice to solve the problems at issue. The combination of AI and blockchain technology in the form of smart contracts entails a situation where algorithms impact contract terms. Security of smart contract transactions depends on the quality of underlying algorithms. Relevant legislative modifications needed to provide for the liability of algorithms, especially in the context of AI, seem imminent. In fact, directives 2019/770 and 2019/771, which have only recently been adopted by the EU, are notable examples of a new regulatory approach to the issue of software liability. The author of this article suggests that in order to provide enhanced legal certainty, the quality of AI program code should be standardised. This would set a benchmark of algorithm quality that could be used to determine the liability of computer programs for their autonomous decisions.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.