Editing Laws of robotics (section)

== EPSRC / AHRC principles of robotics ==
In 2011, the [[Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council]] (EPSRC) and the [[Arts and Humanities Research Council]] (AHRC) of [[United Kingdom]] jointly published a set of five ethical "principles for designers, builders and users of robots" in the [[wikt:real world|real world]], along with seven "high-level messages" intended to be conveyed, based on a September 2010 research workshop:<ref name="revolution" /><ref>{{cite web|title=Principles of robotics: Regulating Robots in the Real World|url=http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/research/ourportfolio/themes/engineering/activities/principlesofrobotics/|publisher=[[Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council]]|access-date=2011-10-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Winfield|first=Alan|title=Five roboethical principles – for humans|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21028111.100-five-roboethical-principles--for-humans.htm|publisher=[[New Scientist]]|access-date=2011-10-03}}</ref>

# Robots should not be designed solely or primarily to kill or harm humans.
# Humans, not robots, are responsible agents. Robots are tools designed to achieve human goals.
# Robots should be designed in ways that assure their safety and security.
# Robots are artifacts; they should not be designed to exploit vulnerable users by evoking an emotional response or dependency. It should always be possible to tell a robot from a human.
# It should always be possible to find out who is legally responsible for a robot.

The messages intended to be conveyed were:
# We believe robots have the potential to provide immense positive impact to society. We want to encourage responsible robot research.
# Bad practice hurts us all.
# Addressing obvious public concerns will help us all make progress.
# It is important to demonstrate that we, as roboticists, are committed to the best possible standards of practice.
# To understand the context and consequences of our research, we should work with experts from other disciplines, including: social sciences, law, philosophy and the arts.
# We should consider the ethics of transparency: are there limits to what should be openly available?
# When we see erroneous accounts in the press, we commit to take the time to contact the reporting journalists.
The EPSRC principles are broadly recognised as a useful starting point. In 2016 Tony Prescott organised a workshop to revise these principles, e.g. to differentiate ethical from legal principles.<ref>{{cite journal|date=2017|title=Legal vs. ethical obligations – a comment on the EPSRC's principles for robotics|url=https://philpapers.org/rec/MLLLVE|journal=Connection Science|doi=10.1080/09540091.2016.1276516|author=Müller, Vincent C.|volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=137–141 |bibcode=2017ConSc..29..137M |s2cid=19080722 }}</ref>