Loading...
Publication
Os desafios no cumprimento das obrigações na era da inteligência artificial (IA): a limitação convencional da responsabilidade civil na utilização destes novos mecanismos
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 817.76 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O artigo aborda o papel transformador da Inteligência Artificial (IA) nos diversos setores, destacando sua crescente relevância e os desafios jurídicos decorrentes de sua aplicação. Ferramentas como chatbots, sistemas avançados como o ChatGPT e tradutores automáticos são exemplos dessa "era de ouro" da IA, que oferece benefícios como maior eficiência, redução de erros e diminuição de custos. Contudo, esses avanços trazem riscos, como violações de propriedade intelectual, privacidade e problemas operacionais, que levantam questões no âmbito da responsabilidade civil.O foco do artigo está na dificuldade de adequar o regime jurídico português e europeu à realidade da IA, especialmente no que diz respeito à limitação de responsabilidade em contratos entre utilizadores e fornecedores ou naqueles executados por sistemas deIA. Questões fundamentais surgem: pode o direito civil considerar a IA capaz de discernir entre o lícito e o ilícito? É possível responsabilizar juridicamente esses sistemas? Caso contrário, sobre quem recairia a responsabilidade? As normas jurídicas atuais são suficientes para lidar com as especificidades dessa tecnologia?A investigação busca soluções jurídicas que superem a insuficiência dos regimes vigentes, equilibrando os direitos das partes e os riscos da IA. Utilizando uma metodologia documental, com análises de doutrina, jurisprudência e, eventualmente, dados comparativos, o estudo conclui que o direito português enfrenta limitações significativas. O artigo 809.º do Código Civil, que regula cláusulas de exclusão de responsabilidade, invalida aquelas envolvendo dolo ou culpa grave. Conforme Pinto Monteiro, cláusulas limitativas visam restringir responsabilidades que, sem previsão contratual, recairiam sobre o devedor, mas enfrentam restrições rigorosas impostas pela jurisprudência, incluindo pelo Supremo Tribunal de Justiça.Além disso, os regulamentos europeus, como os relativos a produtos defeituosos, mostram-se inadequados para abordar a complexidade da IA. O Artificial Intelligence Act(AIA), proposta da União Europeia, representa um marco embrionário, mas ainda insuficiente para regular os desafios jurídicos apresentados por sistemas de IA. O artigo conclui que soluções jurídicas atualizadas são indispensáveis para lidar com as especificidades e inovações dessa tecnologia disruptiva, garantindo um equilíbrio justo entre autonomia contratual e segurança jurídica.
The article addresses the transformative role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) across various sectors, emphasizing its growing relevance and the legal challenges arising from its application. Tools such as chatbots, advanced systems like ChatGPT, and automated translation software exemplify this "golden era" of AI, offering benefits such as increased efficiency, error reduction, and cost savings. However, these advancements also entail risks, including violations of intellectual property rights, privacy concerns, and operational issues, raising questions within the domain of civil liability.The article focuses on the difficulty of adapting Portuguese and European legal frameworks to the reality of AI, particularly regarding the limitation of liability in contracts between users and providers or those executed through AI systems. Fundamental questions arise: Can civil law consider AI systems capable of discerning between lawful and unlawful actions? Is it possible to assign legal liability to such systems? If not, upon whom would the responsibility fall? Are existing legal norms adequate to address the specificities of this technology?The research seeks legal solutions that overcome the insufficiencies of current regimes, balancing the rights of contracting parties with the risks posed by AI. Through a documentary methodology, including analyses of legal doctrine, case law, and, where applicable, comparative data, the study concludes that Portuguese law faces significant limitations. Article 809 of the Civil Code, which governs clauses excluding liability, invalidates those involving intent or gross negligence. According to Pinto Monteiro, limitation clauses aim to restrict, in advance, liabilities that, in the absence of contractual provisions, would fall on the obligor. However, they face stringent restrictions imposed by case law, including rulings from the Supreme Court of Justice.Furthermore, European regulations, such as those on defective products, are inadequate to address the complexities of AI. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), a proposal by the European Union, constitutes an embryonic framework but remains insufficient to regulate the legal challenges posed by AI systems. The article concludes that updated legal solutions are essential to address the specificities and innovations of this disruptive technology, ensuring a fair balance between contractual autonomy and legal certainty.
The article addresses the transformative role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) across various sectors, emphasizing its growing relevance and the legal challenges arising from its application. Tools such as chatbots, advanced systems like ChatGPT, and automated translation software exemplify this "golden era" of AI, offering benefits such as increased efficiency, error reduction, and cost savings. However, these advancements also entail risks, including violations of intellectual property rights, privacy concerns, and operational issues, raising questions within the domain of civil liability.The article focuses on the difficulty of adapting Portuguese and European legal frameworks to the reality of AI, particularly regarding the limitation of liability in contracts between users and providers or those executed through AI systems. Fundamental questions arise: Can civil law consider AI systems capable of discerning between lawful and unlawful actions? Is it possible to assign legal liability to such systems? If not, upon whom would the responsibility fall? Are existing legal norms adequate to address the specificities of this technology?The research seeks legal solutions that overcome the insufficiencies of current regimes, balancing the rights of contracting parties with the risks posed by AI. Through a documentary methodology, including analyses of legal doctrine, case law, and, where applicable, comparative data, the study concludes that Portuguese law faces significant limitations. Article 809 of the Civil Code, which governs clauses excluding liability, invalidates those involving intent or gross negligence. According to Pinto Monteiro, limitation clauses aim to restrict, in advance, liabilities that, in the absence of contractual provisions, would fall on the obligor. However, they face stringent restrictions imposed by case law, including rulings from the Supreme Court of Justice.Furthermore, European regulations, such as those on defective products, are inadequate to address the complexities of AI. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), a proposal by the European Union, constitutes an embryonic framework but remains insufficient to regulate the legal challenges posed by AI systems. The article concludes that updated legal solutions are essential to address the specificities and innovations of this disruptive technology, ensuring a fair balance between contractual autonomy and legal certainty.
Description
Keywords
AI Auxiliares Auxiliaries Cláusulas limitativas Contracts Contractual civil liability Contratos IA Limitation clauses Responsabilidade civil contratual
Pedagogical Context
Citation
Pereira, A. S. P. D. S. (2025). Os desafios no cumprimento das obrigações na era da inteligência artificial (IA): a limitação convencional da responsabilidade civil na utilização destes novos mecanismos. In F. D. S. Veiga, & B. S. Załucka (Eds.), Technological and legal aspects of AI in the city (1 ed., pp. 216-228). Instituto Iberoamericano de Estudos Jurídicos.
Publisher
Instituto Iberoamericano de Estudos Jurídicos