人工智能法律主体资格实现路径:以商事主体为视角

The Realization Path of Artificial Intelligence Legal Subject Qualification: From the Perspective of Commercial Subject

人工智能能否具备法律主体资格地位至今为止争执不休,并形成法律主体说、法律客体说与折中说三种观点。透过莫衷一是的学术争论背后可发现,实践需求与技术发展需要为人工智能提供一定的法律地位。对此,传统的应对路径有两种,一是创设全新法律主体,但此种路径会消耗大量宝贵的立法成本,且在短期内也无此迫切需求。二是通过寻求对现行法律规范的解释认可人工智能主体地位,但此种路径只能通过"类推"或"拟制"的办法承载人工智能主体资格,无法真正实现其法律地位。而在商事组织范畴中,介于公司与合伙之间的LLC因其具有无成员与内部治理灵活性的特点,可作为人工智能法律主体的壳,并以较低制度成本实现其法律地位。我国在植入LLC中应采取"区分有无成员、区分目的是何"的双重区分原则实现LLC的本土化构建,以助推人工智能的发展。

Whether artificial intelligence can become a legal entity has been arguing so far,and has formed three views:legal subject theory,legal object theory,and eclectic theory.It can be found from the academic debate that the needs of practice and the development of technology need to provide a certain legal status for artificial intelligence.There are two traditional response paths.One is to create a wholly new legal subject,but this path will consume a lot of valuable legislative costs,and there is no such urgent need in the short term.The second is to seek an explanation of the existing legal norms,but this path can only carry the artificial intelligence subject qualification through"analog"or"fabrication"methods,and cannot truly achieve its legal status.However,in the area of commercial organizations,due to its characteristics of no members and flexibility in internal governance,LLC,which is between the company and the partnership,can serve as the shell of the legal subject of artificial intelligence and achieve its legal status at a lower institutional cost.In the implantation of LLC in our country,we should adopt the dual distinction principle of"differentiating the presence or absence of members and what the purpose is"to realize the localization of LLC to promote the development of artificial intelligence.