人工智能立法研究文献汇编 | 专题推荐
人工智能立法研究专题第一期
议题聚焦：人工智能风险治理与发展安全的统筹兼顾
部分学术导师：
周汉华 中国法学会网络与信息法研究会常务副会长兼秘书长、同济大学法学院特聘教授
赵 鹏 中国政法大学法治政府研究院院长、教授
周 辉 中国社科院法学研究所网络与信息法研究室副主任（主持工作）、副研究员
丁晓东 中国人民大学法学院副院长、教授
张吉豫 中国人民大学未来法治研究院执行院长、教授
活动日期：2026年6月3日晚7-9点
线下地点：中国人民大学明德法学楼601
线上参与：腾讯会议 会议号：606-6993-9120
人工智能技术发展伴随哪些潜在风险？哪些风险需要通过立法手段予以规制，哪些风险可由市场机制或行业自律消化？就立法层面而言，人工智能风险治理是否应采取分类分级策略？若实施分类分级，应如何在法律制度层面予以落实？当前各国和各地区对人工智能风险的认知存在显著分歧，这些认知中哪些具有合理性，哪些属于非理性判断？人工智能的风险认知是否会受到国家体制与文化传统的影响？人工智能风险治理也可能对技术进步产生制约，如何在人工智能风险治理中实现发展与安全的动态平衡？法律制度设计如何确立发展与安全的评判标准？如何推动人工智能的可信发展？安全评估、影响性评估等制度工具应如何定位？如何在系统架构设计中融入伦理与法律规范？人工智能风险监管的部门职能划分应如何安排？是否应沿用传统行业及现有行政监管体制？各机构与部门之间如何实现协同配合？
核心文献
Margot E. Kaminski, Regulating the Risks of AI, 103 B.U. L. Rev. 1347 (2023).
Andrew D. Selbst, An Institutional View of Algorithmic Impact Assessments, 35 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 117 (2021).
Orly Lobel, The Law of AI for Good, 75 Fla. L. Rev. 1073 (2023).
Cass R. Sunstein, Beyond the Precautionary Principle, 151 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1003 (2003).
延伸阅读
Matthew U. Scherer, Regulating Artificial Intelligence Systems: Risks, Challenges, Competencies, and Strategies, 29 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 353 (2016).
Alicia Solow-Niederman, Administering Artificial Intelligence, 93 S. Cal. L. Rev. 633 (2020).
Stephen Bryyer, Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation (1993).
Jody Freeman, The Private Role in Public Governance, 75 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 543 (2000).
Orly Lobel, The Renew Deal: The Fall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary Legal Thought, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 342 (2004).
Orly Lobel, New Governance as Regulatory Governance, in The Oxford Handbook of Governance 65 (David Levi-Faur ed., 2012).
Emily S. Bremer, Private Complements to Public Governance, 81 Mo. L. Rev. 1115 (2016).
Edward Lee, Technological Fair Use, 83 S. Cal. L. Rev. 797 (2010).
Cary Coglianese & Colton R. Crum, Regulating Multifunctionality, in The Oxford Handbook of the Foundations and Regulation of Generative AI (Philipp Hacker eds., 2025).
Dan M. Kahan, Paul Slovic, Donald Braman & John Gastil, Fear of Democracy: A Cultural Evaluation of Sunstein on Risk, 119 Harv. L. Rev. 1071 (2006).
其他议题与待研讨文献
人工智能伦理、科技演进与法律稳定性的协调
人工智能科技发展日新月异，而法律具有相对稳定性，人工智能立法有何独特性，如何避免“立法即滞后”的困境？人工智能立法可从以往新兴科技规制实践中汲取哪些经验？人工智能企业与行业的自律机制能否更及时有效地回应现实问题，其存在哪些外部性问题需要法律强制介入？法律的强制性规定如何与企业和行业的自律机制相衔接？何为人工智能伦理规范？人工智能伦理审查与现有的个人信息保护委员会审查、医疗等领域的行业性审查应如何理解其关系？如何发挥人工智能伦理规范的治理效能？人工智能伦理是否属于软法范畴，其法律强制力应如何设定？如何定位人工智能科技伦理审查制度？为维持科技变化与法律稳定性的平衡，行政规制与司法救济应分别发挥何种作用？行政规制、侵权法等制度工具如何发挥其比较优势，如何进行协调配合？
核心文献
Cary Coglianese & Colton R. Crum, Leashes, Not Guardrails- A Management-Based Approach to Artificial Intelligence Risk Regulation, 45 Risk Analysis 4397 (2025).
Ian Ayres, John Braithwaite, Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate (1992).
Alex Muller & Christopher Yoo, Taking Standards Seriously: The Case for a Private Standards-Based Approach to AI Governance, 40 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1273 (2026).
Chinmayi Sharma, AI's Hippocratic Oath, 102 Wash. U. L. Rev. 1101 (2025).
Rebecca Crootof & BJ Ard, Structuring Techlaw, 34 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 347 (2021).
Gary E. Marchant & Carlos I. Gutierrez, Soft Law 2.0: An Agile and Effective Governance Approach for Artificial Intelligence, 24 Minn. J.L. Sci. & Tech. 375 (2023).
延伸阅读
Gary E. Marchant & Yvonne A. Stevens, Resilience: A New Tool in the Risk Governance Toolbox for Emerging Technologies, 51 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 233 (2017).
The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight: The Pacing Problem (Gary E. Marchant, Braden R. Allenby & Joseph R. Herkert eds., 2011).
Daniel J. Gervais, The Regulation of Inchoate Technologies, 47 Hous. L. Rev. 665 (2010).
Kenneth A. Bamberger, Regulation as Delegation: Private Firms, Decisionmaking, and Accountability in the Administrative State, 56 Duke L.J. 377 (2006).
Miriam C. Buiten, Towards Intelligent Regulation of Artificial Intelligence, 10 Eur. J. Risk Reg. 41 (2019).
Neel Guha et al., AI Regulation Has Its Own Alignment Problem: The Technical and Institutional Feasibility of Disclosure, Registration, Licensing, and Auditing, 92 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1473 (2024).
Daniel E. Walters & Hannah J. Wiseman, Self-Regulation in Emerging and Innovative Industries, 62 Hous. L. Rev. 543 (2025).
Anna Butenko & Pierre Larouche, Regulation for Innovativeness or Regulation of Innovation?, 7 L. Innovation & Tech. 52 (2015).
Gary E. Marchant, Governance of Emerging Technologies as a Wicked Problem, 73 Vand. L. Rev. 1861 (2020).
Ari Ezra Waldman, Challenging Technical Expertise, 106 B.U. L. Rev. 453 (2026).
Hilary J. Allen, Regulatory Sandboxes, 87 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 579 (2019).
Jonathan S. Gould & Rory Van Loo, Legislating for the Future, 92 U. Chi. L. Rev. 375 (2025).
Rory Van Loo, Rise of the Digital Regulator, 66 Duke L.J. 1267 (2017).
人工智能美欧立法比较与中国涉外法治建设
人工智能的发展与法律规制，美国与欧盟是中国涉外法治中较为关键的两大国家与地区。如何理解美国人工智能立法的整体框架与路径，特别是特朗普政府上台以来美国人工智能联邦规制机构在人工智能规制取向上的微妙变化？如何评估美国科罗拉多州、犹他州、加州等若干州的重要立法？如何理解欧盟的《人工智能法》及其与既有欧盟数字监管法律体系的关系？如何评估欧盟《数字综合法案》在人工智能监管方面的调整？在人工智能立法领域，欧盟是否仍能发挥所谓的布鲁塞尔效应？如何理解美欧在人工智能法律制度方面的差异与博弈？相较于美国、欧盟以及其他国家和地区的人工智能立法，中国的人工智能立法应坚持何种原则，采取何种制度？人工智能背景下，中国的数据跨境流动等相关制度应如何设计？中国的人工智能法律制度如何发挥社会主义制度优势，如何参与全球人工智能治理？
核心文献
Marco Almada & Nicolas Petit, The EU AI Act: Between the Rock of Product Safety and the Hard Place of Fundamental Rights, 62 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 85 (2025).
Luciano Floridi, The European Legislation on AI: A Brief Analysis of Its Philosophical Approach, 34 Philos. & Tech. 215 (2021).
Margot E. Kaminski & Andrew D. Selbst, An American's Guide to the EU AI Act, 40 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1081 (2025).
Sonya K. Katyal, Private Accountability in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, 66 UCLA L. Rev. 54 (2019).
Ifeoma Ajunwa, The Artificial Intelligence Commission, 115 Geo. L.J. ___ (forthcoming 2027).
Sorelle A. Friedler & Andrew D. Selbst, The OMB Artificial Intelligence Memoranda, 40 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1237 (2025).
Deirdre K. Mulligan & Kenneth A. Bamberger, Recentering Public Values in AI Governance: Examples from the Biden Administration, 40 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1135 (2025).
延伸阅读
Anupam Chander, How Law Made Silicon Valley, 63 Emory L.J. 639 (2014).
EU AI Act, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act), 2024 O.J. (L 1689) 1.
US National Institution of Standards & Technology, Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Second Draft (2022), https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2022/08/18/AI_RMF_2nd_draft.pdf.
Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 6-1-1701 to -1707 (2024).
Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act, Utah Code Ann. §§ 13-72-101 to -202 (2024).
Matthew Sag & Peter K. Yu, The Globalization of Copyright Exceptions for AI Training, 74 Emory L.J. 1163 (2025).
Aziz Z. Huq, The Geopolitics of Digital Regulation, 92 U. Chi. L. Rev. 833 (2025).
Ryan Calo, Artificial Intelligence Policy: A Primer and Roadmap, 51 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 399 (2017).
生成式人工智能与内容治理的法律框架
生成式人工智能可能引发侮辱诽谤、虚假信息、谣言、幻觉、网络暴力等一系列问题，如何构建生成式人工智能内容治理的法律框架？生成式人工智能的内容生产如何构建有利于信息传播、人民民主、对外传播的法律制度框架？对于生成式人工智能供应链上的不同主体与行为，例如数据收集、数据清洗、预训练大模型、大模型调整与优化、大模型发布与系统部署、用户使用，这些不同主体与行为应分别承担何种义务？人工智能的技术发展是价值中立的吗？不同国家和地区对生成式人工智能采用不同的内容治理框架，如何把握其治理的制度框架与底层逻辑？中国的生成式人工智能内容治理如何体现与融入中国的自主价值观？
核心文献
Eugene Volokh, Large Libel Models? Liability for AI Output, 3 J. Free Speech L. 489 (2023).
Peter Henderson, Tatsunori Hashimoto & Mark A. Lemley, Where's the Liability in Harmful AI Speech?, 3 J. Free Speech L. 589 (2023).
Michael P. Goodyear, Artificial Infringement, U.C. L.J. (forthcoming 2026), https://ssrn.com/abstract=5184405.
Cass R. Sunstein, Artificial Intelligence and the First Amendment, 92 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1207 (2024).
延伸阅读
Jane Bambauer, Negligent AI Speech: Some Thoughts About Duty, 3 J. Free Speech L. 343 (2023).
Dan L. Burk, Asemic Defamation, or, the Death of the AI Speaker, 22 First Amendment L. Rev. 189 (2024).
Eugene Volokh, Mark A. Lemley & Peter Henderson, Freedom of Speech and AI Output, 3 J. Free Speech L. 651 (2023).
Peter N. Salib, AI Outputs Are Not Protected Speech, 102 Wash. U. L. Rev. 83 (2024).
人工智能侵权与安全港规则
人工智能侵权呈现哪些特殊形态，是否需要设置一般侵权制度之外的专项规则？人工智能侵权的不同类型，例如个人信息侵权、言论侵权（侮辱诽谤等）、著作权侵权，不同类型的侵权形态与责任有何差异？人工智能侵权的归责原则应采取过错责任、过错推定责任还是严格责任？人工智能侵权制度的基本定位应是过错认定还是威慑预防？人工智能侵权中损害、因果关系往往存在不确定性，如何认定损害与确定因果关系？人工智能侵权往往具有大规模侵权特征，传统侵权制度如何适应与应对人工智能侵权的规模问题？人工智能企业的各类免责声明能否免除或减轻企业的侵权责任？人工智能侵权是否适用或可以类推适用以“通知删除”为基础的安全港规则？
核心文献
Katherine Lee, A. Feder Cooper & James Grimmelmann, Talkin' 'Bout AI Generation: Copyright and the Generative-AI Supply Chain, 72 J. Copyright Soc'y 251 (2025).
Andrew D. Selbst, Negligence and AI's Human Users, 100 B.U. L. Rev. 1315 (2020).
Mihailis E. Diamantis, Reasonable AI: A Negligence Standard, 78 Vand. L. Rev. 573 (2025).
Nicholson Price II & I. Glenn Cohen, Locating Liability for Medical AI, 73 DePaul L. Rev. 339 (2024).
Mark A. Lemley & Bryan Casey, Remedies for Robots, 86 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1311 (2019).
Michael R. Bartels, Programmed Defamation: Applying § 230 of the Communications Decency Act to Recommendation Systems, 89 Fordham L. Rev. 651 (2020).
Nicholas O'Donnell, Have We No Decency? Section 230 and the Liability of Social Media Companies for Deepfake Videos, 2021 U. Ill. L. Rev. 701 (2021).
Catherine M. Sharkey, Modern Tort Law: Preventing Harms, Not Recognizing Wrongs, 134 Harv. L. Rev. 1423 (2021).
Guido Calabresi & Spencer Smith, On Tort Law's Dualisms, 135 Harv. L. Rev. F. 184 (2022).
延伸阅读
Mihailis E. Diamantis, Vicarious Liability for AI, 99 Ind. L.J. 317 (2023).
Ryan Abbott, The Reasonable Computer: Disrupting the Paradigm of Tort Liability, 86 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1 (2018).
George S. Cole, Tort Liability for Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, 10 Comp. L.J. 127 (1990).
Jane Bambauer, Negligent AI Speech: Some Thoughts About Duty, 3 J. Free Speech L. 343 (2023).
Meg Leta Ambrose & Ben M. Ambrose, When Robots Lie: A Comparison of Auto-Defamation Law, in 2014 IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Robotics and Its Social Impacts 56 (2014).
Kacy Popyer, Cache-22: The Fine Line Between Information and Defamation in Google's Autocomplete Function, 34 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 835 (2016).
Vincent Dumas, Comment, Enigma Machines: Deep Learning Algorithms as Information Content Providers Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 2022 Wis. L. Rev. 1581 (2023).
Anna Beckers & Gunther Teubner, Responsibility for Algorithmic Misconduct: Unity or Fragmentation of Liability Regimes?, 25 Yale J.L. & Tech. 76 (2023).
Eleanora Rosati, Infringing AI: Liability for AI-Generated Outputs Under International, EU, and UK Copyright Law, 16 Eur. J. Risk Reg. 603 (2025).
Mala Chatterjee & Jeanne C. Fromer, Minds, Machines, and the Law: The Case of Volition in Copyright Law, 119 Colum. L. Rev. 1887 (2019).
Jules L. Coleman, The Mixed Conception of Corrective Justice, 77 Iowa L. Rev. 427 (1992).
John C.P. Goldberg & Benjamin C. Zipursky, Accidents of the Great Society, 64 Md. L. Rev. 364 (2005).
自动驾驶与产品类人工智能制度
自动驾驶的法律制度有何独特性？对于产品类与具身人工智能，其民事法律责任制度应如何设计？法律是否应对构成产品的软件与人工智能系统适用产品责任？如何对自动驾驶等产品的人工智能系统本身进行制度设计，提升与维持产品类人工智能的合理安全性？人工智能产品责任中的设计责任、制造责任与警告责任如何配置？如何理解产品责任制度的基本功能与原理？产品责任能否激励人工智能企业披露信息，发挥人工智能监管中的信息生产功能？针对人工智能的持续迭代特征，产品责任是否需要强化上市后持续性监控？产品责任制度在人工智能时代是否需要更新与迭代？如何理解欧盟《产品责任指令》对于人工智能责任的新规定与全球产品责任制度的演进与发展？人工智能时代的产品保险制度应如何设计？自动驾驶与产品类人工智能责任制度中的侵权、规制与保险制度如何协调？
核心文献
Bryan H. Choi, Crashworthy Code, 94 Wash. L. Rev. 39 (2019).
Kenneth S. Abraham & Robert L. Rabin, Automated Vehicles and Manufacturer Responsibility for Accidents: A New Legal Regime for a New Era, 105 Va. L. Rev. 127 (2019).
Bryant Walker Smith & Matthew T. Wansley, Regulating Robotaxis, 99 S. Cal. L. Rev. 603 (2026).
Philipp Hacker, The European AI Liability Directives: Critique of a Half-Hearted Approach and Lessons for the Future, 51 Computer L. & Sec. Rev., no. 105871 (2023).
Gerhard Wagner, Liability Rules for the Digital Age: Aiming for the Brussels Effect, 13 J. Eur. Tort L. 191 (2022).
Gregory C. Keating, Products Liability as Enterprise Liability, 10 J. Tort L. 41 (2017).
Catherine M. Sharkey, A Products Liability Framework for AI, 25 Colum. Sci. & Tech. L. Rev. 240 (2024).
John C.P. Goldberg & Benjamin C. Zipursky, The Easy Case for Products Liability Law: A Response to Professors Polinsky and Shavell, 123 Harv. L. Rev. 1919 (2010).
Kenneth S. Abraham & Catherine M. Sharkey, Untangling AI Liability, 115 Calif. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2027), https://ssrn.com/abstract=6293099.
Mark A. Geistfeld, Tort Law in the Age of Statutes, 99 Iowa L. Rev. 957 (2014).
Douglas A. Kysar, The Public Life of Private Law: Tort Law as a Risk Regulation Mechanism, 9 Eur. J. Risk Reg. 48 (2018).
David Freeman Engstrom, Agencies as Litigation Gatekeepers, 123 Yale L.J. 616 (2013).
延伸阅读
Nora Freeman Engstrom, When Cars Crash: The Automobile's Tort Law Legacy, 53 Wake Forest L. Rev. 293 (2018).
Gary T. Schwartz, Auto No-Fault and First-Party Insurance: Advantages and Problems, 73 S. Cal. L. Rev. 611 (2000).
Bryant Walker Smith, Automated Driving and Product Liability, 2017 Mich. St. L. Rev. 1 (2017).
Bryan H. Choi, Software as a Profession, 33 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 557 (2020).
Jay P. Kesan & Carol M. Hayes, Bugs in the Market: Creating a Legitimate, Transparent, and Vendor-Focused Market for Software Vulnerabilities, 58 Ariz. L. Rev. 753 (2016).
Michael D. Scott, Tort Liability for Vendors of Insecure Software: Has the Time Finally Come?, 67 Md. L. Rev. 425, 430 (2008).
Gerhard Wagner, Robot Liability, in Liability for Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things 27 (Sebastian Lohsse, Reiner Schulze & Dirk Staudenmayer eds., 2019).
Herbert Zech, Liability for AI: Public Policy Considerations, 22 ERA F. 147 (2021).
Gerhard Wagner, Robot, Inc.: Personhood for Autonomous Systems?, 88 Fordham L. Rev. 591 (2019).
William L. Prosser, The Fall of the Citadel (Strict Liability to the Consumer), 50 Minn. L. Rev. 791 (1966).
Guido Calabresi, Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Torts, 70 Yale L.J. 499 (1961).
Ernest J. Weinrib, Deterrence and Corrective Justice, 50 UCLA L. Rev. 621 (2002).
John C.P. Goldberg & Benjamin C. Zipursky, Torts as Wrongs, 88 Tex. L. Rev. 917 (2010).
Richard A. Posner, Instrumental and Noninstrumental Theories of Tort Law, 88 Ind. L.J. 469 (2013).
Michael L. Rustad, Torts as Public Wrongs, 38 Pepp. L. Rev. 433 (2011).
Michael L. Rustad, Twenty-First-Century Tort Theories: The Internalist/Externalist Debate, 88 Ind. L.J. 419 (2013).
Steven Shavell, Liability for Harm Versus Regulation of Safety, 13 J. Legal Stud. 357 (1984).
Richard C. Ausness, H. Lee Barfield II, David A. King, Joshua R. Denton & Stephen J. Jasper, Providing a Safe Harbor for Those Who Play by the Rules: The Case for a Strong Regulatory Compliance Defense, 2008 Utah L. Rev. 115 (2008).
Richard B. Stewart, Regulatory Compliance Preclusion of Tort Liability: Limiting the Dual-Track System, 88 Geo. L.J. 2167 (2000).
Theodore Eisenberg, Measuring the Deterrent Effect of Punitive Damages, 87 Geo. L.J. 347 (1998).
Richard B. Stewart, Regulatory Compliance Preclusion of Tort Liability: Limiting the Dual-Track System, 88 Geo. L.J. 2167 (2000).
Wendy E. Wagner, When All Else Fails: Regulating Risky Products Through Tort Litigation, 95 Geo. L.J. 693 (2007).
Teresa Moran Schwartz, Regulatory Standards and Products Liability: Striking the Right Balance Between the Two, 30 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 431 (1997).
Clayton P. Gillette & James E. Krier, Risk, Courts, and Agencies, 138 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1027 (1990).
Michael D. Green, Statutory Compliance and Tort Liability: Examining the Strongest Case, 30 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 461 (1997).
Robert L. Rabin, Reassessing Regulatory Compliance, 88 Geo. L.J. 2049 (2000).
智能体、意思表示与数据安全责任
智能体带来哪些独特的法律问题？智能体所做出的意思表示是否具有法律效力，在何种情形下具有法律效力？法律应如何设置有关智能体的交易规则？在智能体背景下，如何判断交易主体的真实意思表示与合同是否成立？人工智能时代的合同法与意思表示制度是否需要更新？智能体的行为边界如何通过法律约束，如何防范智能体的各种不当甚至是违法行为？随着“算法消费者”的出现与智能体辅助消费者决策的广泛应用，人工智能时代的用户与消费者权益如何进行保护？端侧智能体存在哪些数据安全风险？在手机等终端设备运行的端侧智能体如何确保个体的隐私与个人信息不受侵害？“龙虾”等智能体调用不同应用程序如何获得用户与消费者等相关主体授权，存在何种不正当竞争问题？法律如何确定其数据安全责任？
核心文献
Michal S. Gal & Niva Elkin-Koren, Algorithmic Consumers, 30 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 309 (2017).
Christoph Busch, Consumer Law for AI Agents, 26 German L.J. 1367 (2025).
Noam Kolt, Governing AI Agents, 101 Notre Dame L. Rev. ___ (forthcoming 2026), https://ssrn.com/abstract=4772956.
Rory Van Loo, Consumer Agents, 103 Wash. U. L. Rev. 705 (2026).
Ian Ayres & Jack M. Balkin, The Law of AI Is the Law of Risky Agents Without Intentions, U. Chi. L. Rev. Online (2024)
Bryan Casey & Mark A. Lemley, You Might Be a Robot, 105 Cornell L. Rev. 287 (2020).
Frank Pasquale & Vanna Carter, Agentizing Privacy Preferences Without Privatizing Data Protection Policy, 39 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 453 (2025).
延伸阅读
Peter Cartwright, The Consumer Image Within EU Law, in Research Handbook on EU Consumer and Contract Law 199 (Christian Twigg-Flesner ed., 2016).
Omri Ben-Shahar & Carl E. Schneider, More Than You Wanted to Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure (2014).
Oren Bar-Gill, Defending (Smart) Disclosure: A Comment on More Than You Wanted to Know, 11 Jerusalem Rev. Legal Stud. 75 (2015).
Ryan Calo, Digital Market Manipulation, 82 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 995 (2014).
Richard Craswell, Regulating Deceptive Advertising: The Role of Cost-Benefit Analysis, 64 S. Cal. L. Rev. 549 (1991).
Jack M. Balkin, Information Fiduciaries and the First Amendment, 49 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1183 (2016).
Ari Ezra Waldman, Privacy as Trust: Sharing Personal Information in a Networked World, 69 U. Mia. L. Rev. 559 (2015).
Neil M. Richards & Woodrow Hartzog, Taking Trust Seriously in Privacy Law, 19 Stan. Tech. L. Rev. 431 (2016).
Mark A. Lemley & Pamela Samuelson, Interfaces and Interoperability After Google v. Oracle, 100 Tex. L. Rev. 1 (2021).
开源人工智能模型与开源社区的治理规则
人工智能模型的“开源”应如何界定？应至少公开模型架构、训练代码、训练数据、模型权重、测试代码、测试数据、评测结果等部分中的哪些内容？人工智能开源许可证应满足哪些条件？法律基础是什么？对于不同开放程度和开源许可证下的模型，在责任分配与治理规则上有何差异？开源模型在著作权、数据合规、个人信息保护、商业秘密与安全风险方面是否存在哪些特殊问题和规则？开源人工智能的创新价值、社区自治与国家监管之间应如何协调？如何建立模型提供者、微调者、部署者、平台与社区维护者、行业组织及相关科技工作者群体等多元协同的开源人工智能治理模式？
核心文献
Sonia K. Katyal, The Paradox of Source Code Secrecy, 104 Cornell L. Rev. 1183 (2019).
Thibault Schrepel & Jason Potts, Measuring the Openness of AI Foundation Models: Competition and Policy Implications, 34 Info. & Comm. Tech. L. 279 (2025).
Parth Nobel, Alan Z. Rozenshtein & Chinmayi Sharma, Untangling AI Openness, 2026 Wis. L. Rev. 171 (2026).
Mark A. Lemley & Ziv Shafir, Who Chooses Open-Source Software?, 78 U. Chi. L. Rev. 139 (2011).
Bryan H. Choi, Tainted Source Code: Open-Source Software and Tort Liability, 39 Harvard JOLT 1 (2025).
延伸阅读
Aayush Garg & Nisha, Open-Source Software and Intellectual Property Rights, 4 Jus Corpus L.J. 50 (2023).
David Atkinson, Open Shouldn't Mean Exempt: Open-Source Exceptionalism and Generative AI, arXiv:2510.16048v2 [cs.CY] (2026).
Dirk Riehle, The Economic Motivation of Open Source Software: Stakeholder Perspectives, 40 Computer 25 (2007).
Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, Some Simple Economics of Open Source, 50 J. Indus. Econ. 197 (2002).
Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, The Scope of Open Source Licensing, 21 J.L. Econ. & Org. 20 (2005).
David McGowan, Legal Implications of Open-Source Software, 2001 U. Ill. L. Rev. 241 (2001).
Paul B. de Laat, Copyright or Copyleft? An Analysis of Property Regimes for Software Development, 34 Rsch. Pol'y 1511 (2005).
Lawrence Lessig, Re-crafting a Public Domain, 18 Yale J.L. & Human. 56 (2006).
Lawrence Lessig, The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World (2001).
Lawrence Lessig, The Limits in Open Code: Regulatory Standards and the Future of the Net, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 759 (1999).
Yochai Benkler, Coase's Penguin, or, Linux and the Nature of the Firm, 112 Yale L.J. 369 (2002).
Robert F.J. Seddon, Copilot, Copying, Commons, Community, Culture, Free Software Found. (Feb. 24, 2022), https://www.fsf.org/licensing/copilot/copilot-copying-commons-community-culture.
Sihem Ben Sassi & Sbai Nesrine, Characterizing Open Source Software Licenses Texts: An Insight from Legal Terms Perspective, RIADI Lab. (2022).
人工智能训练数据使用的合法性问题
未经许可使用作品数据训练人工智能，训练者能否主张合理使用或者法定许可的抗辩？当人工智能输出与训练数据存在某种程度相似性，此时人工智能训练是否存在侵权行为？如果认定存在著作权或其他侵权，如何判断人工智能数据供应链上不同主体的相关责任？是否有必要通过修改著作权法来合法化使用作品数据训练人工智能的行为？美国、欧盟等不同法域在人工智能训练数据使用的合法性问题上的立场如何？如何看待非表达性利用、合理学习等人工智能合法利用著作权数据的理论？如何看待利用“文本与数据挖掘”例外规则、“转换性使用”规则，来应对训练数据使用的合法性问题？构建人工智能训练数据的法定许可或者集体管理制度是否具有可行性？训练数据