Artificial Intelligence as an Object of Legal Regulation: Concepts, Types and Signs

Recently, more and more attention has been paid to the legal regulation of artificial intelligence. Yes, in many countries today, innovations of modern technologies are used: technical filling for a smart home, unmanned cars, lawyers-bots, etc. - this testifies to the growing role of artificial intelligence in society. In one of his interviews, I. Musk, referring to artificial intelligence, noted that the modern development of IT technologies necessitates the need for a full study of artificial intelligence as an object of law, its features, types and opportunities. The purpose of the article is to investigate artificial intelligence as an object of legal regulation, to define its concept, features and types. This paper examines the positions and arguments of scientists regarding the possibility of the relation of artificial intelligence to the object of law, to determine its types and features. Artificial intelligence (artificial intelligence) is understood as the ability of automatic systems to assume human functions to choose and make optimal decisions based on previous life experience and the analysis of external influences At the doctrine level, there are two classifications of AI, the difference being that some scientists distinguish "superintelligence" as a form of AI, while others do not. In our opinion, the classification of AI into two types is justified: "weak" - can perform only cognitive tasks, using a pre-written algorithm of actions, without deviation from it, and strong - capable of independent learning and thinking, through continuous self-programming based on updated base of received material. The main arguments in favor of the fact that AI is by its nature gravitating to the objects of legal relations or instruments of their realization are, first, that AI is the result of the activity of a person in respect of which persons have certain rights and obligations; and, secondly, in view of the provisions of European Parliament Resolution 2015/2103, the subject of prosecution for damages caused by AI is proposed to install a non-electronic person. These are the basis for stating that a weak AI in its features and function weighs more the object of law, in relation to a strong AI, it contains the features of both the subject and the object of law