Legal Issues for Mobile Servant Robots

This paper identifies key legal issues which are emerging for Mobile Servant Robots (MSRs), a sub-type of Personal Care Robots (PCR) defined in ISO 13482. New cases are likely to be introduced in the market soon even though appropriate and specific binding legal regulations regarding MSRs are missing and several questions need to be carefully considered. The main issues of concern are the need for a concrete and holistic definition of MSR, clarification on the confusion among new emerging ISO/IEC robot categories (especially between boundaries and gaps in machinery with medical device regulations), unclear liability scenarios (avoiding harm, prospective liability, butterfly effect), defining and regulating human-robot collaborations and relationships, ethical issues (mass surveillance, post-monitoring personal data), autonomy (from the robot but also from the user perspective), isolation scenarios, etc. Despite the recent technical advances, there is still a long way ahead and further research is needed to overcome a variety of associated legal and ethical issues which are emerging.

[1]  Jason Borenstein,et al.  Robotic Nudges: The Ethics of Engineering a More Socially Just Human Being , 2015, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[2]  Beno Benhabib,et al.  A Survey of Autonomous Human Affect Detection Methods for Social Robots Engaged in Natural HRI , 2016, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[3]  Bruce A. MacDonald,et al.  The Role of Healthcare Robots for Older People at Home: A Review , 2014, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[4]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Towards Safe and Trustworthy Social Robots: Ethical Challenges and Practical Issues , 2015, ICSR.

[5]  En Iso,et al.  DECLARATION OF CONFORMITY TO COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/42/EEC (INCLUDING DIRECTIVE 2007/47/EEC) CONCERNING MEDICAL DEVICES , 2010 .

[6]  Oli Mival,et al.  From human-computer interactions to human-companion relationships , 2010, IITM '10.

[7]  Akio Yamamoto,et al.  Neurological and Robot-Controlled Induction of an Apparition , 2014, Current Biology.

[8]  N. Sharkey,et al.  Granny and the robots: ethical issues in robot care for the elderly , 2012, Ethics and Information Technology.

[9]  Mark Levine,et al.  Overcoming the uncanny valley: Displays of emotions reduce the uncanniness of humanlike robots , 2016, 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[10]  Ryan Calo.  Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw , 2014 .

[11]  Emily C. Collins,et al.  Saying It with Light: A Pilot Study of Affective Communication Using the MIRO Robot , 2015, Living Machines.

[12]  Marco Cempini,et al.  Guidelines on Regulating Robotics , 2014 .

[13]  Heather Draper,et al.  Robot carers, ethics, and older people , 2014, Ethics and Information Technology.

[14]  Woodrow Hartzog,et al.  UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE ROBOTS , 2015 .

[15]  Gentiane Venture,et al.  This Robot is Sociable: Close-up on the Gestures and Measured Motion of a Human Responding to a Proactive Robot , 2015, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[16]  Ana Paiva,et al.  More Social and Emotional Behaviour May Lead to Poorer Perceptions of a Social Robot , 2015, ICSR.

[17]  Pericle Salvini,et al.  On Ethical, Legal and Social Issues of Care Robots , 2015, Intelligent Assistive Robots.

[18]  Norbert Reich,et al.  Product safety and product liability — An analysis of the EEC Council Directive of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations, and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products , 1986 .

[19]  Christian Laugier,et al.  From Proxemics Theory to Socially-Aware Navigation: A Survey , 2014, International Journal of Social Robotics.

[20]  Gurvinder S. Virk,et al.  ISO 13482 - The new safety standard for personal care robots , 2014, ISR 2014.