Boundaries in Play-based Cloud-companion-mediated Robotic

Therapies

From Deception to Privacy Concerns

Eduard Fosch-VillarongaJoint International Doctoral (Ph.D.) Degree in Law, Science and Technology coordinated by

CIRSFID, Università di Bologna, Italy. IDT-UAB, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain (e-mail: eduard.fosch@unibo.it).

Jordi Albo-CanalsCEEO, Tufts University Boston, Massachusetts, US (e-mail:

jordi.albo_canals@tufts.edu)

Introduction

• Discourse of robotics: brainstorming phase

• Some projects regarding robot therapy: DREAM

• Literature: benefits of the therapy, ethical issues

• Legal boundaries?

BUT

Juridical PrinciplesEuropean Charter of Fundamental Rights: Dignity, Human integrity, Equality, Health Care, Privacy, Data Protection, Freedom of Thought/Expression, Cultural/Religious/Linguistic diversity, Good administration, non-discrimination, Fair Working conditions, etc.

[B-J. Koops et al. “Robotic Technologies and Fundamental Rights. Robotics Challenging the European Constitutional Framework” Int J Tech Ethics, 4(2), 2013, pp. 15-35.]

EU RoboLaw Project- 5 legal themes: health, safety, consumer, and environmental

regulation; liability; intellectual property rights; privacy and data protection; and capacity to perform legal transactions

Care Robots- 9 ethical questions: safety, responsibility, autonomy, independence,

enablement, privacy, social connectedness, new technologies and justice, and ethics and scientific research

- In addition to this: importance of respecting fundamental rights (e.g. independence and autonomy in the light of independent living, participating in community life, equality and access), liability and insurance, privacy, and the legal capacity and legal acts performed by robots.

D6.2. Guidelines on Regulating Robotics. EU RoboLaw Project, 2014, more specifically pp. 167-196 also p. 18.

Care Robots

Personal Care Robots: service robot that performs actions contributing directly towards improvement in the quality of life of humans, excluding medical applications.

Medical Device: any instrument, apparatus, appliance, software, material or other article, whether used alone or in combination, including the software intended by its manufacturer to be used specifically for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes and necessary for its proper application, intended by the manufacturer to be used for human beings for the purpose of:- diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, treatment or alleviation

disease- Diagnosis, monitoring, treatment, alleviation of or compensation

for an injury or handicap, - Investigation, replacement or modification of the anatomy or of a

physiological process, - Control of conception[Barriers to Market, Development, Use]

Lack of coherent theoretical and functional framework of the domains, hence requirements and terminology are not consistent across stakeholders

[ROBOTICS 2020 Multi-Annual Roadmap – For Robotics in Europe, Call 2 ICT 24 (2015), Horizon 2020, SPARC]

Problem

• There is no concrete definition of “care robots” or “therapeutic robots”.

• There are confusing categories among ISO 13482:2014 Personal Care Robots (Toy Robots, Medical Devices).

• There is no concrete binding regulation addressing what fundamental rights these robots might violate; if they should be granted agenthood; or what happens if they cause harm

• This technology is already entering the market

This leads roboticists building a precise technology to a two-fold problem:

1. The identification of the principles involved in their technology;

2. The understanding of their meaning

Identification/Understanding of the Involved Principles

Variables

• Human-Robot Interaction

• Attributes of the Robot

• Technology applied to the Robot

• Context where is inserted

Human-Robot Interaction

PCaR: Person Carrier RobotPAR: Physical Assistant RobotMSR: Mobile Servant RobotTR Therapeutic RobotCR: Companion Robot

This is important because

As Hookie aims at working at the cognitive level improving the social skills of the autistic children. This could be involved in:

- Cognitive harm

- Prospective liability

“There is the possibility that a medical robot will cause harms to its patients in the future”

[E. Datteri. Predicting the Long-Term Effects of Human- Robot Interaction: A Reflection on Responibility in Medical Robotics. Sci Eng Ethics 19, 2013, pp. 139-160.]

Attributes of the Robot

Privacy and Safety are the biggest concerns in robotics

“Robotics combines […] the promiscuity of information with the capacity to do physical harm” [R. Calo, “Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw”. California Law Review 103, 2015, pp. 101-148.]

Encrypted tunnel to protect data-in-motion

Private cloud with an individual login and password to protect data-at-rest

Access to data is restricted to researchers in the project

Data will be deleted after 3 years

Autonomy two-fold issue

A) Robot perspective: 1. Deception (WoZ) : although blind research is

permitted

2. Liability

3. Artificial empathy

4. Agenthood: on-going debate (liability)

5. Replacement of human therapists

The more autonomous a technology is, the more it needs to be sensible to values an norms. [S. Steinert, “The Five Robots – A Taxonomy for Roboethics” Int J Soc Rob 6, 2014, pp. 249-260]

Public Attitudes towards care robots are not very good [Eurobarometer 427 on Autonomous Systems 2015, p. 30]

Autonomy two-fold issue

B) User perspective: 1. Acceptance

a) Physical appearance (Hookie is non-biomimetic)

b) Responsivity (proxemics)

2. Final say of the parents: general therapy provided by the State

3. Auto-Exclusion: the robot should not promote it

4. Agenthood

5. Replacement of human therapists

Technology applied to the Robot

Hookie aims at processing big data: IBM WatsonProfiling, individualised treatment: privacy concernsHookie will diagnose autism in the future: Medical DeviceExternal sensors can record data irrelevant to the therapy

Context

This include

a) physical premises: structured/unstructured environments

b) Integration in school projects

c) End user: severity of the autism, age of the user

This involves Government and Public Institutions, as they are meant to ensure the principle of justices, e.g. the equal distribution of available resources

This also conceals an intrinsic moral duty to roboticists, i.e. the creation of affordable and accessible technology (which is a primary objective of Hookie)

Conclusions

The identification of general principles concerning robotics represents a great effort towards something yet unaddressed by policy makers.

Even so, roboticists need to know the concrete principles underlying their particular technology.

These can be classified according to the HRI: The more complex the HRI is, the more complex the associated legal issues become

However, only taking into account other variables like robot attributes, the technology applied to the robot and the context where it will be inserted, it will be possible to know precisely which principles will apply to each particular situation.

Hookie

HRI

HUMAN-ROBOT

INTERACTION

HRSI

HUMAN-ROBOT SAFE

INTERACTION

RELATIONSHIP

- Relationship that evolves over time- Social and emotional investment- Personality of the robot- Intelligence, multimodal- Robot App Stores- Social state recognition- Robot learning

Standardising:- Robot’s spatial behaviour in

response to human presence- Robot’s noise level for robots

in human environment- Perception for HRI- Generic and High-Priority commands for HRI- Gestures across different

cultures

Therapeutic Robots

Future Work

Practical solutions to the legal issues identified

Thank you for your attention!

Eduard Fosch-VillarongaJoint International Doctoral (Ph.D.) Degree in Law, Science and Technology coordinated by CIRSFID, Università di Bologna, Italy. IDT-UAB, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain (e-mail: eduard.fosch@unibo.it).

Jordi Albo-CanalsCEEO, Tufts University Boston, Massachusetts, US (e-mail: jordi.albo_canals@tufts.edu)

Thank you for your attention

Eduard Fosch-VillarongaJoint International Doctoral (Ph.D.) Degree in Law, Science and Technology coordinated by

CIRSFID, Università di Bologna, Italy. IDT-UAB, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain (e-mail: eduard.fosch@unibo.it).

Jordi Albo-CanalsCEEO, Tufts University Boston, Massachusetts, US (e-mail:

jordi.albo_canals@tufts.edu)