TRANSCHEGARAVIY TIJORAT MUNOSABATLARIDA SUN’IY INTELLEKT TIZIMLARINING HUQUQ LAYOQATIGA OID NAZARIYALAR TAHLILI
##semicolon##
transchegaraviy tijorat, sun’iy intellekt, huquq layoqati, kvazisubyekt, elektron shaxs, sun’iy intellektning javobgarligi, xalqaro savdo##article.abstract##
Mazkur maqolada transchegaraviy tijorat munosabatlarida sun’iy intellekt tizimlarining huquq layoqatiga oid masalalari muhokama qilindi. Bundan tashqari, mazkur maqolada milliy va xorijiy olimlarning sun’iy intellektning huquq subyektliligiga layoqati to‘g‘risidagi fikrlari tahlil qilindi. Olingan ilmiy tahlillar natijasida muallifning ushbu masalalar yuzasidan mualliflik pozitsiyasi bayon qilindi. Tadqiqotda sun’iy intellektni huquq subyekti sifatida e’tirof etish imkoniyati, uning shartnomaviy munosabatlardagi roli, intellektual mulk, shaxsga doir ma’lumotlar xavfsizligi hamda yetkazilgan zarar uchun javobgarlik bilan bog‘liq muammolar ko‘rib chiqildi. Shuningdek, romano-german, anglo-sakson va islom huquqi tizimlarining sun’iy intellektga nisbatan yondashuvlari, Yevropa Ittifoqi, AQSH va boshqa yurisdiksiyalardagi huquqiy tendensiyalar tahlil etildi. Tadqiqot natijasida sun’iy intellektni mustaqil huquq subyekti sifatida tan olish hozircha maqsadga muvofiq emasligi, biroq uning rivojlanishi kelgusida alohida huquqiy maqomga ega kvazisubyekt sifatida e’tirof etilishini istisno etmasligi asoslantirildi. Shu bilan birga, sun’iy intellektni xalqaro tijorat munosabatlarini tartibga solish obyekti sifatida tan olish va javobgarlik masalalari zarurligi tahlil qilindi.
##plugins.themes.default.displayStats.downloads##
##submission.citations##
Abbott, R. (2016). I think, therefore I invent: Creative computers and the future of patent law. Boston College Law Review, 57(4), 1079–1126. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2727884
Bayern, S. (2016). The implications of modern business-entity law for the regulation of autonomous systems. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 7(2), 297–309. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X00005729
Born, G. B. (2014). International commercial arbitration (2nd ed.). Kluwer Law International.
Bradford, A. (2020). The Brussels effect: How the European Union rules the world. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190088583.001.0001
Bryson, J. J., Diamantis, M. E., & Grant, T. D. (2017). Of, for, and by the people: The legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(3), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9214-9
Burri, M. (2017). The governance of data and data flows in trade agreements: The pitfalls of legal adaptation. UC Davis Law Review, 51(1), 65–133.
El-Kady, R. (2026). Navigating the intersection of law and innovation: The criminal legal framework for self-driving cars in the AI-driven automotive industry. In A. Skeja, V. Ramadani, N. Sadiku-Dushi, M. Dabić, M. Valeri, & G. Keskin (Eds.), Navigating AI in business: Strategies and insights across disciplines (pp. 365–387). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-02526-5_20
Emon, A. M. (2010). Islamic natural law theories. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579006.001.0001
European Parliament. (2017, February 16). European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on civil law rules on robotics (2015/2103(INL)) (P8_TA(2017)0051). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0051_EN.html
Fazal, M. A. (2026). AI and Islamic jurisprudence: Re-reading contemporary fatwās for ethical possibilities in techno-social forms of life. Islamic Studies Review, 5(1), 91–116. https://doi.org/10.56529/isr.v5i1.540
Gulyamov, S. S., & Bozarov, S. S. (2022). Strategies and future prospects of development of artificial intelligence: World experience. World Bulletin of Management and Law, 9, 66–74. https://scholarexpress.net/index.php/wbml/article/view/841
International Chamber of Commerce, & World Trade Organization. (2025, December 11). Adopting AI for trade: Business insights to inform policy and practice. https://iccwbo.org/news-publications/report/adopting-ai-for-trade-business-insights-to-inform-policy-and-practice/
Mitchell, A. D., & Mishra, N. (2019). Regulating cross-border data flows in a data-driven world: How WTO law can contribute. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(3), 389–416.
Retto, J. (2017, November). Sophia, first citizen robot of the world. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321319964_SOPHIA_FIRST_CITIZEN_ROBOT_OF_THE_WORLD
Shrestha, S. (2021). Nature, nurture, or neither? Liability for automated and autonomous artificial intelligence torts based on human design and influences. George Mason Law Review, 29(1), 375. https://lawreview.gmu.edu/print__issues/nature-nurture-or-neither-liability-for-automated-and-autonomous-artificial-intelligence-torts-based-on-human-design-and-influences/
Solum, L. B. (1992). Legal personhood for artificial intelligences. North Carolina Law Review, 70(4), 1231–1287. https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol70/iss4/4/
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. (2024, July 15). UNCITRAL Model Law on Automated Contracting finalized by the UN Commission on International Trade Law. United Nations Information Service. https://unis.unvienna.org/unis/pressrels/2024/unisl362.html
Wagner, G. (2019). Robot liability. In S. Lohsse, R. Schulze, & D. Staudenmayer (Eds.), Liability for artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things: Münster colloquia on EU law and the digital economy IV (pp. 25–62). Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845294797-25
Zarkadakis, G. (2018). Do we need new laws for artificial intelligence? World Economic Forum.
