a comparison of legal visualization and technical visualization vytautas Čyras vilnius university,...

A Comparison of Legal Visualization and Technical

Visualization

Vytautas ČYRASVilnius University,

Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics, Vilnius, Lithuania

Vytautas.Cyras@mif.vu.lt

1.Limiting a class of

pictures

2

Limiting the scope of analysis

• 2 domains– law– technical domain (technology)

• A classification of pictures in law; see Röhl & Ulbrich (2007)– iconic pictures– logical pictures (logische Bilder)– other pictures

3

A comparison frameworkA framework for knowledge visualization [Eppler and

Burkhard 2006]; see also [Zachman 1987]1. Knowledge type (What? What type of knowledge is

visualized (object)?)Legal knowledge

2. Visualization goal (Why? Why should that knowledge be visualized (purpose)?)Accomplishing functions and tasks in the 2 domains – law and

technology

3. Visualization format (How? How can the knowledge be represented (method)?)

Logical pictures – conceptual diagrams

4

The three different perspectives [Eppler and Burkhard 2006]

Knowledge type (what?)

• Know-what?

• Know-how?

• Know-why?

• Know-where?

• Know-who?

Visualization goal (why?)

• Transferring (clarification, elicitation, socialization)

• Creating (discovery, combination)

• Learning (acquisition, internationalization)

• Finding (e.g., experts, documents, groups)

• Assessing (evaluation, rating)

5

Visualization format (how?)

• Heuristic sketches• Conceptual diag-

rams (purpose – to structure information and illustrate relationships)

• Visual metaphors• Knowledge

animations• Knowledge maps• Domain structures

Limiting the technical domain

1. Technical drawingsElectrical diagrams, piping, ventilation, etc.

2. Air traffic managementAirport arrival and departure charts

3. Information systems (IS) requirements engineering (RE). UML diagrams

4. Virtual worlds, e.g. “Second Life”, “World of Warcraft”

“Drawing is law”

Legal subjects: manufacturers, sellers, maintenance, etc.6

The spirit of domain

• Visualizations preserving the spirit– of the legal domain– of the technical domain

7

Property Legal visualization Technical visualization

Knowledge type (what?) Legal knowledge Requirements

Visualization goal (why?)

Legal tasks Contracts

Format (how?) Logical pictures Conceptual diagrams

Abstractness of norms Yes No

Freedom of interpretation

Big Little

Open texture problem Yes No

Decision Yes, no, intermediate Yes, no

Purpose of decision Solve a dispute Answer yes/no

Interpreters of legal knowledge

Jurists – have legal education

Engineers – do not have legal education

Synthesis No. Yes. Software is generated automatically

2.Examples of

visualizations in law

9

Legal argumentation

10

Dialogue default sequence for argumentation scheme; see D.Walton (2003)

Legal reasoning

11

Value-based Argumentation Framework (VAF) showing arguments, objections and rebuttals; see Bex et al. (2009)

The spirit of mathematics outweighs the spirit of law

12

A mathematical structure – partial order – in legal argument. A theory for 3 cases – Pierson v. Post, Keeble v. Hickeringill and Young v. Hitchens; see Bench-Capon (2002)

The structure of norm

• Telos (goal)• See also F. Lachmayer (1977) “Grundzüge einer

Normentheorie”

13

Norm

(1) Condition

(2.4) Object

(3) Telos

(2.1) Subject (2.3) Action

(2.3

) M

od

us

ABte

„positiv“„positiv“

N ( A)

(1) sets the relation A te B(2) evaluates: both the action A and the goal B(3) sets the norm N(A)

The spirit of the law is preserved

(1)

(2)(2)

(3) STM(A te B)

STM (Wert)

A graphical notation has no strict syntax and semantics. Though it visualizes strict statements:

3. Examples of pictures in

technical domains

15

Electrical connections diagram

16

• Recht in Bilder (Law in Diagram)

• Technical rules in computer, in Computer-Aided Design system

• “Diagram is law”

• Legally binding agreement

A landing procedure for

an aircraft

17

• Strict semantics of the rules.• Subject – the pilot.• An observer at the airport detects violations of the rules.

“Diagram is law”

Graphical notation for

legal requirements

18

SI* graphical notation; see L.Compagna et al. “How to integrate legal requirements into a requirements engineering methodology for the development of security and privacy patterns” (2009)

Normative positions in software requirements

19

Entitlements, permissions, etc., in SI* model of the health care scenario [Compagna et al. 2009]

Virtual worlds• Serious, e.g. “Second Life”,

“Active Worlds” Educational Universe

• Not gamese.g. “World of Warcraft”

• I am neither a proponent nor opponent of them.

20

Consider negative factors such as addiction

Research & software development projectFP7 ICT VirtualLife project, 3 years from 01.01.2008

Title “Secure, Trusted and Legally Ruled Collaboration Environment in Virtual Life”. Acronym “VirtualLife”

Goal: software platform – peer-to-peer architecture

Learning support as a use scenario, e.g. “University Virtual Campus”

Sample scenariosWeb 2.0

– information as a content

– asynchronous communication

“University Virtual Campus”– interaction as a content

– synchronous communication

21

From legal rules – to virtual world rules – to rules in software

22

This translation complies with:– Lawrence Lessig’s conception “Code is law”– Raph Koster’s “Declaration of the Rights of Avatars”

‘Keep off the grass’

‘The subject – avatar – is forbidden the action – walking on the grass’

A software program, i.e. a script. Implemented by trigers which control the avatar

Natural intelligence – a team of (1) a legal expert, and (2) virtual world developer

Natural intelligence – a programmer

Translation

Translation

Examples of rules1. An avatar is forbidden to touch objects not owned by him

or a certain group.

2. An avatar not belonging to a given group is forbidden to a given area of the zone.

3. An avatar is forbidden to create more than a given number of objects during a given time interval.

4. An avatar is forbidden to use a given dictionary of words (slang) while chatting with other avatars.

5. An avatar of age is forbidden to chat with avatars under age.

6. An avatar is forbidden to execute authorized scripts in a certain area.

23

4. A comparison

24

Property Legal visualization Technical visualization

Knowledge type (what?) Legal knowledge. Sources: doctrine, statutes, case law, etc.

Requirements engineering

Visualization goal (why?) Legal tasks Legally binding relationships

Format (how?) Logical pictures Conceptual diagrams

Abstractness of norms Yes No

Freedom of interpretation Big (in certain extent).Grammatical interpretation, teleological, etc.

Little

Open texture problem Yes. Introduced intentio-nally. Variety of situations

No. Verification, validation, testing

Decision Yes/no/intermediate Yes/no

Purpose of decision Solve a dispute.Criterion: justice

Answer yes/no

Interpretation of legal knowledge is different

Jurists – have legal education

Engineers – do not have legal education

Formalism Not wanted Wanted – for automation

Synthesis No.“Yes”, for simple cases

Yes. Software can be generated from diagrams

The goals of the comparison

• Modeling• Formalization• Theory development• “Symbolization”• Reflection• Knowledge representation• Creating diagrams

• Sociological aspects: I am not an expert26

A need for a detailed diagram

27

Quelle: von Hoyningen-Huene, Betriebliches Arbeitsrecht, 1977

„In Abbildung ist diese Hierarchievorstellung auch in der Sache anfechtbar. Es gibt naemlich keine klare Hierarchie zwischen dem Europarecht und dem nationalen Verfassungsrecht, denn noch immer leitet das Europarecht seine Geltung in Deutschland aus Art.23 GG ab.“ [Röhl & Ulbrich 2007, p.159-160]

Rechtsquellenpyramide des Arbeitsrechts

The principle of the primacy of EC law requires detailed hierarchical diagrams. The concepts:• direct applicability (unmittelbare Geltung),• direct effect (unmittelbare Anwendbarkeit) (Van Gend & Loos, Costa)• duty to set aside conflicting national rules• horizontal direct effect (Defrenne), • no horizontal effect for directives (Marshall),• state liability (Francovich), etc.

Thank you

http://www.usercentricmedia.org/workshops/trustvws2009/

Vytautas.Cyras@mif.vu.lt