Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
The societal impact of artificial intelligence – What artificial intelligence can do in the legal system and how Anna Ronkainen Chief Scientist, TrademarkNow @ronkaine AIHelsinki kickoff 2015-12-16 $200–300B USD/year! A lot of difficult conversations to be had about AI and society - will full employment be just a pipe dream – and is it even desirable anymore - will income equality increase even more if people are divided into those who tell computers what to do and those who do what computers tell them to do - will we still allow people to drive cars - will big data and omnipresent data gathering make privacy a thing of the past - ...oh, and about those autonomous weapons... Presuming we’re a more solutionoriented bunch in this room... - commercially AI is now where mobile was in the ~1980s: the only way is up - probably no new N-word in sight, instead many smaller Finnish companies doing quite well (look around you) - AI potentially affecting 100–200k jobs in Finland alone by 2025, and that tech has to come from somewhere What’s law got to do with it? - one of the very first application domains for AI (1950s) - back in the day, law was at the forefront of the automatic data processing revolution in general (e.g. the great Pennsylvania Health Code search-and-replace) - kind of a structural isomorphism between law (as commands from the legislator to be carried out by a judge or a citizen) and software (commands from the programmer to be carried out by the CPU), superficially correct but misleading In ye olden days (and still in Finland) there were legal informatics - everything having to do with computers and the law lumped into one discipline - software copyright, patents, privacy... - computational legal theory - theory of legal information - originally a 50/50 mix of people with a (often practical) legal background and a CS background, until the 1990s More and less recent trends in AI & law - 1980s: expert systems (and logics) - 1990s: ontologies (and logics) - 2000s: argumentation (and logics) - 2010s: outside interest/wake-up call from ediscovery (and logics) - a research community of ~500 people - main confs ICAIL and JURIX; AI&law journal published by $pringer A couple of real-life examples (Ronkainen (2010): Mosong, a Fuzzy Logic Model of Trade Mark Similarity) What we do at TrademarkNow - trademark search: making sure your new brand isn’t too close to earlier trademarks to give your problems - trademark watch: alerting you about new filings too close to your own marks to help you take the necessary steps to protect them (by filing an opposition against the new mark) - globally, now >60 jurisdictions fully covered How we do it - - - - data acquisition, import inbound processing of individual marks, storage search and watch UIs likelihood of confusion algorithm - similarity of trademarks - phonetical, graphical, semantic, animal, mineral - similarity of goods and services - registrability (absolute grounds) analysis and other useful information (e.g. dictionary results) - reporting - ...all using all kinds of AI techniques from GOFAI to deep learning as appropriate Why Finland needs more AI & law - fewest lawyers per capita in the OECD - court system struggles esp. with processing times (many, many ECHR judgements) - most solutions have to be jurisdictionspecific (because the law is so different) - small country = small market, not all that interesting for outsiders Why AI & law needs Finland - the AI & law research community has been rather insular (focus on just a couple of special topics at a time, no new ideas coming from the outside) - little focus on building systems with a practical impact (or even validation, or even doing work that can be validated) - ...and (of course) lots of amazeballs AI people with mad skillz in Finland Thank you!