How Will AI Shape the Future of Law?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto How Will AI Shape the Future of Law? EDITED BY RIIKKA KOULU & LAURA KONTIAINEN 2019 Acknowledgements The editors and the University of Helsinki Legal Tech Lab would like to thank the authors and interviewees for the time and effort they put into their papers. We would also like to thank the Faculty of Law at University of Helsinki and particularly the continuous kind support of Professor Kimmo Nuotio, the former dean of the faculty and the Lab’s unofficial godfather, for facilitating the Lab’s development and for helping us make the second Legal Tech Conference happen. In addition, we would like to express our gratitude to the conference sponsors, Finnish Bar Association, the Association of Finnish Lawyers, Edita Publishing, Attorneys at Law Fondia and Attorneys at Law Roschier as well as the Legal Design Summit community for their support. It takes a village to raise a conference. Therefore, we would like to thank everyone whose time and commitment has turned the conference and this publication from an idea into reality. Thank you to the attendees, speakers, volunteers and Legal Tech Lab crew members. RIIKKA KOULU & LAURA KONTIAINEN Legal Tech Lab, University of Helsinki 2019 University of Helsinki Legal Tech Lab publications © Authors and Legal Tech Lab ISBN 978-951-51-5476-7 (print) ISBN 978-951-51-5477-4 (PDF) Print Veiters Helsinki 2019 Contents Foreword 009 KIMMO NUOTIO I Digital Transformation of the Society? Legal Tech Con 2018 – How Will AI Shape the Future of Law 017 LAURA KONTIAINEN Picturing Technological Futures – an Interview with Adam Greenfield 037 JENNI HAKKARAINEN AND KALLE MARKKANEN II Will Digitalisation Lead to Robojudges? AI in the Judiciary – an Interview with Dory Reiling 049 DORY REILING AND LAURA KONTIAINEN Artificial Intelligence Improving the Delivery of Justice and How Courts Operate 063 SANNA LUOMA III Law at Intersections of Information, Innovation and Technology Smart Legal Information Services 105 SARI KORHONEN AND ALTTI MIEHO Exploring News Automation – Notes on Transparency and Copyright 115 ANETTE ALÉN-SAVIKKO Black Box AI – The Problem with Sufficient Disclosure 119 ATTE KUISMIN IV Towards New Horizons of Law Research Modelling Justice by Emergence? Rights and Values in AI Development 155 RIIKKA KOULU AND TIMO HONKELA Towards AI-Driven Society. A Legal Perspective 195 BEATA MÄIHÄNIEMI, HANNE HIRVONEN, TUOMAS PÖYSTI, BURKHARD SCHAFER, DORY REILING, LEO LEPPÄNEN, ANURADHA NAYAK AND LAURA LASSILA 009 Foreword Artificial intelligence is a catch word, very obviously. Policymakers just love it. If you have it in your research proposal, you might double your chances of getting funding. Even we lawyers have learned to use if (even if we would not always be able to say how it differs from automation, machine learning and other similar tech catch words). Including myself. Why this is so? We are sure that the artificial intelligence is about to come and that it will change many ways we deal with law. We just do not yet really know how. As such, the topic is not new. If you go through the lists of academic articles on artificial intelligence and law, you will find a continuation of articles from the 1980’s onwards. And you will also find that the articles deal with the topic from a variety of angles. As could maybe be expected, the articles cover almost anything the legal studies cover more generally. You can read about legal reasoning, privacy, copyright. You can read about envisioned changes of practices in the law firms and the courts. You can read about automatization and liability issues. You can read even about applications of AI in the field of criminal law. 010 In my early years as an academic scholar I had some interest in the theory of the so-called risk society. One question that was involved in the discussions was precisely the one whether technology is a blessing or a curse. Is technological development one of the causes of trouble as concerns the development of our societies, or could we use technological tools for the benefit of the governance of the society – and the control of the risks. One observation in that discussion was that the technological development often happens outside of the political process. Innovations are just simply adopted without any legal policy debate, and the legislature tends to regulate the things after the facts. In the 1980’s and 1990’s this was an issue when personal computers were introduced. This changed the work of the legal profession very much as well. There were talks about possible further waves of automatization and that routine activities or even more demanding decision-making could be automated and handled by machines. Not much happened at that front. AI continued to be rather science fiction. I did a simple test. I searched the Finnish legal databases in order to find traces of any regulations or disputes as regards AI. Not a single hit. If you search ‘automation’, you will already find something. In the aviation law you will find regulation on unmanned aircraft. And Finland got its first ever Space Act just this year. Always when we see that new technologies are about to come, we find it difficult to judge how much it will really change. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky have shown that much of human reasoning is in fact rather intuitive, and only seldom are we able to really reach high standards of rationality in our reasoning. The qualities of factual legal reasoning are something that we should be looking at more closely. We should not be afraid of getting help, if we can have that. But it seems that we still want out real cases to 011 be handled by human beings. Just like we wish to see a barber, not a robot. In any case, maybe the biggest issue is that concerning how we adopt the new technologies to serve us. It is extremely important that we lawyers are involved in these processes. It is quite natural that legal regulations could slow down this development, and in order to move forward, many new legal rules have to be elaborated. Liability issues concern accidents in traffic in which automated vehicles take part is a clear example. I believe we should be open-minded and curious and let the developers show what they can. Some other areas are more sensitive. We should be mindful of legal cultures and legal traditions; we should adapt AI in law to recognize this, just as it does in linguistics. We should use technological tools to improve access to justice. We need legal design, bringing law closer to people. The European union is today planning to introduce a European approach to the adoption of AI technologies. The Commission of the European Union outlined recently some basics of the European approach. It really makes sense to develop a European approach. This we have already seen in other fields as well; data protection being the most recent example. In the Communication the Commission states that: “This is how EU can make a difference – and be the champion of an approach to AI that benefits people and society as a world.” – These are big words, and these should be taken very seriously. Law seems to be rather important in this framework. As with any transformative technology, artificial intelligence may raise new ethical and legal questions, related to liability or potentially biased decision-making. New technologies should not 012 mean new values. The Commission will present ethical guidelines on AI development by the end of 2018, based on the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, taking into account principles such as data protection and transparency, and building on the work of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. To help develop these guidelines, the Commission will bring together all relevant stakeholders in a European AI Alliance. By mid-2019 the Commission will also issue guidance on the interpretation of the Product Liability Directive in the light of technological developments, to ensure legal clarity for consumers and producers in case of defective products.”1 Finland could take an active role in contributing to this development since due to the upcoming Finnish presidency in the Fall of 2019 Finland gets to have access to the relevant tables where these things are being discussed. The European Union could and should a leader in combining high ethical standards with strong development of the tech tools. We have rather interesting times ahead of us, since so much is still in the making. We should contribute to all this. I think we are. I have been happy to see that our Faculty has built for itself a profile in legal tech. This we have done in a close collaboration with the key players in Finland. Maybe we were a bit latecomers, that is what the legal tech freaks would probably say. But law faculties tend to be conservative, and things start to happen first when a signal gets stronger. Some two years ago this started to happen. All this grew out of a relatively well-functioning collaboration with legal experts outside of the university frames. If I now look back, I believe that some activists 1 European Commission, Artificial intelligence: Commission outlines a European approach to boost investment and set ethical guidelines. Press release, Brussels, 25 April 2018. within the IT law association of Finland have actually been rather 013 important drivers of this development. In 2016 the first Legal Design Summit was organized in Helsinki, the Legal Tech Lab was launched, and now we have already had the second legal tech conference.