Legal Issues in the Digital Age

Personal Autonomy and the Autonomy of Artificial Intelligence Systems, or why Algorithmic Computing Systems Will Not Be Recognized as Subjects of Law

2026-07-06T21:39:26+03:00

The author analyzes concepts used in attempts to determine the status of an artificial intelligence (AI) system and its place in modern law. He notes the uniqueness of a person as a subject of law and compares the autonomy of the human will with the autonomy of the AI system. It is emphasized that AI systems, like animals, do not have legal personality due to the lack of autonomy of the will as an inherent property of the individual and the subject of law. According to the author, it calis precisely the lack of autonomy of will, one’s own goals and interests that does not allow us to talk about any subjectivity of AI systems, while the presence of cognitive abilities that allow solving various kinds of tasks cannot in itself serve as a basis for recognizing the subjectivity of programs or technical systems used to solve such tasks. Taking into account the fact that people acquire subjectivity within the framework of social relations by entering into such relations with each other, and not with AI, there is no possibility of recognizing AI as a participant in such relations, an as independent person and a subject of law.

Models of Legal Protection for Works Created with Involvement of Artificial Intelligence

2026-07-06T21:39:27+03:00

The research focuses on the legal mechanisms for protecting works created using artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, taking into account their creation specifics and the degree of human creative involvement. The subject of the study is the system of legal mechanisms for protecting such works considering their creation features. The aim of the study is to develop theoretical and methodological foundations for a differentiated approach to legal protection of creative works created using AI technologies, and to formulate proposals for improving legislation in this area. The study hypothesizes the need to abandon the binary model of legal regulation (“protected or not protected”) in favor of a differentiated approach to determining the scope of protection depending on the degree of human creative participation and the level of AI system autonomy. The authors methodology includes formal legal, comparative legal, system-structural methods, and legal modeling. Based on the analysis of Russian and foreign legislation, doctrinal approaches, and judicial practice, the research justifies classifying AI works into three categories: those with predominant human creative contribution, hybrid works, and those with minimal human creative input. The study develops a system of criteria for evaluating the originality of algorithmically generated works (statistical uniqueness, result unpredictability, semantic coherence, aesthetic/functional value). A three-tier model of legal regulation for using protected works in machine learning processes is promoted, along with specific proposals for improving Russian intellectual property legislation considering modern technological challenges: amendments to Article 1228 of the Civil Code regarding criteria for the creative nature of an author’s activity when using AI; to Article 1259 — on the specifics of AI works’ legal regime; to Article 1274 — on free use of works for machine learning purposes; to Article 1286 — on licensing peculiarities for using works in machine learning; and introducing a new paragraph to Chapter 71 of the Code regulating rights to works created with minimal human creative participation (15-year protection period, indication of AI application).

Artificial Intelligence in Courts, Arbitration and Issues of “Hallucinations”

2026-07-06T21:39:28+03:00

The article examines specific aspects of artificial (machine) intelligence in dispute resolution in state and arbitration courts. Drawing on legal research methods and data from artificial intelligence science, the authors propose a significant obstacle to its application in the legal sphere is the so-called “hallucination problem,” i.e., the generation of false data by machine intelligence programs that appear entirely reliable. The objectives of the article are: a) to define and determine the properties of artificial intelligence and its generative variety; b) to identify the specific features of artificial intelligence application in judicial proceedings and arbitration; c) to examine foreign judicial practice in which false data generated by artificial intelligence programs has been identified; and d) to formulate the problem of artificial intelligence “hallucinations” and to seek ways to overcome it. The authors conclude that arbitration is a dispute resolution method more receptive to technological innovations, including artificial intelligence. The potential for implementing machine intelligence in state courts is less clear. However, litigants are using AI tools in their trial preparations. International judicial practice clearly demonstrates the propensity of AI to “hallucinations”: judges uncover fabricated data during trials, leading to liability for litigants who use AI programs without due diligence. Two solutions have been proposed to overcome the problem of “hallucinations.” The first is technological and draws on the work of Russian scientists, who propose the development of more sophisticated generative AI programs free of “hallucinations.” The second solution involves thoroughly reviewing legal texts and procedural documents for false data in cases where there is reason to believe a document was drafted using machine intelligence.

Digital and Information Sovereignty in the Constitutional Doctrine of the Republic of Belarus

2026-07-06T21:39:29+03:00

The author investigates the substance of information sovereignty and digital sovereignty by comparing them from the perspective of constitutional doctrine and legal regulation in the Republic of Belarus. The focus is on distinctive features of the said concepts apparently similar in terms of the meaning they carry. The study comes at a time when the concept of state sovereignty is being transformed by the progress of information and digital technologies to cover digital space. The article offers an interpretation of different transformative processes affecting sovereignty through different factors (such as digitization, integration of countries etc.). The author underlines that the regulatory framework governing information sovereignty and digital sovereignty in Belarus relies on policy documents which establish only purposes, objectives and likely risks. However, it is observed the Constitution of Belarus contains enough fundamental provisions and principles to formulate the concepts of digital and information sovereignty as new forms of state sovereignty. Two concepts of digital sovereignty emerging in parallel depending on the holder are emphasized: state digital sovereignty and individual digital sovereignty. It is noted that promoting individual digital sovereignty is part of the task of achieving state digital sovereignty for a balance between the progress of digital technologies and the exercise of constitutional rights and liberties which are not to be restricted. The conducted comparative study has resulted in evidence-based positions on the substance of digital and information sovereignty, the scope of regulating the said forms of state sovereignty in constitutional law, and the criteria behind distinctions in understanding them. The findings of this research can inform the development of constitutional doctrine and improve the national law in Belarus as they contain well-founded practical proposals for legislative amendment.

Legal Design of Digital Profile: Concept, Features and Limits of Legal Regime

2026-07-06T21:39:30+03:00

There is a discussion around essential features of digital profile to come up with an integral idea of this concept and its legal nature in the article presented. The research is motivated by new digital services (learner’s digital portfolio, young person’s integrated profile at the Public Services Portal, foreign national’s digital profile etc.) which are in process of being designed and implemented to consolidate personal data across various fields of social relationships. The authors purport to identify the concept and legal regime of digital profile as well as to outline the prospects of its integration into the public governance system. Based on comparative study of legal regulations, it was established the digital profile’s legal regime emerges at the junction of laws on personal data, identification/authentication, education, youth policies, and labour. The key features of this regime are voluntary nature of digital profile, decentralized data storage across multiple agency-level information systems, conciliatory third-party access and targeted use for personalized provision of public services. It was found there is currently no overarching regulation that would govern the concept and legal regime of digital profile, secure the rights of persons at law and provide control mechanisms over the use of stored data, something that creates the risks of legal uncertainty. Drafting such specialized regulation will contribute to successful institutionalization of digital profile. The crucial context has emerged with the adoption of Presidential Decree No. 467 on the foreign national’s digital profile of 09 July 2025, a precedent of formalizing mechanisms to implement digital profiles for specific categories of individuals. Promising institutionalization vectors include the transition to proactive public service provision based on profile data; personalized learning and career development paths; integrated platform for individuals to communicate with the government, employers and public agencies. Meanwhile, there are problems of personal data protection, social rating risks and a need for clear delimitation of voluntary and mandatory uses of digital profile.

Corporations and Quasi-Corporate Entities in the Digital Age: Regulatory Experience in Russia and Elsewhere

2026-07-06T21:39:31+03:00

The author explores the national and international experience of regulating corporations and quasi-corporate entities in the digital age. The study is motivated by high social and economic importance of corporations in modern society. Two sides of digitization impact are discussed: internal/procedural aspect of improving classical corporate forms, and the external aspect where digital environment is viewed as a new and unique operational space for corporations and quasi-corporate entities. A controversy between high adaptivity of corporations as economic agents and conservative dogmatism of corporations as legal entities was identified. In its first part, the article explores e-formats of incorporating, managing and operating corporations as business entities. These processes are characterized as procedural digitization not affecting the essence of corporations: while e-incorporation forms were widespread, digitization of corporate governance lagged considerably behind, only to suggest path of dependence. Bridging the gap was largely possible thanks to rapid adaptation of law to global challenges. A high potential of transparent cross-border corporate identity based on universal means of verification was found, with digitization able to considerably build up cross-border corporate operations. In its second part, the article explores in detail the experience of regulating digital platforms, ecosystems, data cooperatives and decentralized autonomous entities. With some exceptions, their legal regulation is conceptual rather than casuistic and risk-oriented. Moreover, with corporate law dogmatics subdued, it is the constructs of tort law which are primarily adopted. A special focus is on the development of specific categories of digital regulation outside classical and known comprehensive branches of law. As regards decentralized autonomous entities, their potential for coordinating digital activities is assessed positively, with adapted corporate legal standing relying primarily on protective provisions justified as applicable to them. Overall, it is identified the limits of applying classical corporate legal philosophy to digital transformation of corporations while underscoring the promise of adapting individual legal models to the digital environment.

Artificial Intelligence. Law. Industries

2026-07-06T13:14:40+03:00

On 10 October 2025, the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) Law Faculty held the XIV International Scientific and Practical Conference “Law in the Digital Age” in furtherance of the discussion of artificial intelligence (AI) and law, a subject brought forward at the XIII International Workshop back in 2024. Whereas the plenary meeting focused on the current problems of AI and law, the panels discussed theoretical and multidisciplinary aspects, civil law regime of AI technologies and objects created through their use, AI and intellectual property, AI issues in specific domains (digital platforms in the public domain and economy; AI and law in health care; AI regulatory policies as a factor of AI integration into the national education systems. An international panel was held as part of the workshop to discuss the developments of AI and law in the BRICS countries. This approach to the discussion of problems around AI and law brings together theoretical and applied aspects for a more comprehensive picture of the problem as a whole.