Open Robotics
Open Robotics
复制标题
开放机器人
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Ryan Calo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ryan Calo
随着数以百万计的家用和服务机器人已经投放市场，还有数以百万计的机器人正在研发中，机器人技术将成为下一个革命性的技术。与个人电脑一样，如果个人机器人对第三方软件和硬件的贡献足够开放，它们更有可能茁壮成长。与电话、电缆、计算机和互联网一样，一个开放的机器人可以促进创新，刺激消费者采用，并创造二级市场。但开放式机器人也可能带来不可估量的法律责任，这可能会导致企业家和投资者放弃开放式机器人，转而青睐功能更有限的产品。这种可能性源于个人电脑和机器人之间的一个关键区别。和个人电脑一样，开放式机器人没有固定功能，运行第三方软件，允许修改。但与个人电脑不同的是，个人机器人处于直接造成身体伤害的位置。因此，反对诉讼的规范和限制责任的权宜之计，如经济损失原则，不太可能从个人电脑和消费者软件环境转移到机器人领域。因此，本文建议对开放机器人平台制造商的最终用户使用这些平台的行为给予选择性豁免，类似于枪支制造商和网站根据联邦法律享有的豁免。选择性免疫有可能在不损害安全激励的情况下保持创新的条件。另一种选择是冒着在一项关键技术上被诉讼门槛更高、领先优势明显的国家甩在后面的风险。
With millions of home and service robots already on the market, and millions more on the way, robotics is poised to be the next transformative technology. As with personal computers, personal robots are more likely to thrive if they are sufficiently open to third-party contributions of software and hardware. No less than with telephony, cable, computing, and the Internet, an open robotics could foster innovation, spur consumer adoption, and create secondary markets. But open robots also present the potential for inestimable legal liability, which may lead entrepreneurs and investors to abandon open robots in favor of products with more limited functionality. This possibility flows from a key difference between personal computers and robots. Like PCs, open robots have no set function, run third-party software, and invite modification. But unlike PCs, personal robots are in a position directly to cause physical damage and injury. Thus, norms against suit and expedients to limit liability such as the economic loss doctrine are unlikely to transfer from the PC and consumer software context to that of robotics. This essay therefore recommends a selective immunity for manufacturers of open robotic platforms for what end users do with these platforms, akin to the immunity enjoyed under federal law by firearms manufacturers and websites. Selective immunity has the potential to preserve the conditions for innovation without compromising incentives for safety. The alternative is to risk being left behind in a key technology by countries with a higher bar to litigation and a serious head start.