Искусственный интеллект и инновации в контексте социального развития: этико-правовой анализ

Стремительное развитие искусственного интеллекта (далее – ИИ) наряду с повышением эффективности инновационной деятельности усиливает актуальность этических и правовых вопросов его регулирования. Целью исследования является анализ этических и правовых проблем, возникающих в условиях интеграции ИИ в инновационную деятельность, систематизация международных и национальных подходов к регулированию, а также оценка особенностей регулирования сферы ИИ в Казахстане. Методологическую основу исследования составили диалектический метод, сравнительный анализ, метод анализа документов, литературный обзор и контент-анализ. В ходе исследования были сравнительно проанализированы подходы к регулированию ИИ, применяемые ЮНЕСКО, OECD, G7/G20, IEEE, WIPO, Европейским союзом и отдельными государствами. Результаты показали, что ОЭСР выделяет 10 ключевых категорий рисков ИИ, включая киберугрозы, манипуляции информацией, усиление социального неравенства, нарушение конфиденциальности и дефицит механизмов управления. Исследование показало, что Европейский союз разработал один из наиболее комплексных подходов к регулированию ИИ, приняв AI Act, включающий 85 статей и систему классификации технологий по уровням риска. Выявлено, что большинство стран сохраняют подход, согласно которому автором результатов интеллектуальной деятельности признаётся исключительно человек, несмотря на активное использование ИИ. Сделан вывод о необходимости формирования комплексной системы этического и правового регулирования ИИ, обеспечивающей баланс между развитием инноваций, защитой прав человека и снижением социальных и технологических рисков.

1. Balkin, J.M. (2015). The path of robotics law. California Law Review Circuit, 6, 45–60. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z388V90

2. Bird & Bird. (2022). Copyright protection for AI-generated works in Singapore. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2022/singapore/copyright-protection-for-ai-generated-works-insingapore

3. Calo, R., Froomkin, A. M., & Kerr, I. (Eds.). (2016). Robot law. Edward Elgar Publishing. Carrillo, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence: From ethics to law. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6), 101937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101937

4. Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. (2026). International AI safety report 2026. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://internationalaisafetyreport.org/publication/international-ai-safety-report-2026

5. Deshpande, A., & Sharp, H. (2022). Responsible AI systems: Who are the stakeholders? In Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 227–236). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514094.3534187

6. Dignum, V. (2019). Responsible artificial intelligence: How to develop and use AI in a responsible way. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30371-6

7. European Commission. (2021). Proposal for a regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0206

8. Filipova, I. A. (2025). Legal regulation of artificial intelligence (3rd ed.). Nizhny Novgorod: Nizhny Novgorod State University.

9. Franchomme, M.-P., & Jazottes, G. (2021). Le défi d’une IA inclusive et responsable. Droit social, 2, 100–108.

10. Frau-Meigs, D. (2024). User empowerment through media and information literacy responses to the evolution of generative artificial intelligence (GAI). UNESCO. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000388547

11. Future of Life Institute. (2017). Asilomar AI principles. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://futureoflife.org/openletter/ai-principles/

12. Gerdes, A. (2025). Weizenbaum’s legacy in the era of public interest AI. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Public Interest AI (PI-AI 2024). Denmark.

13. Google. (2023). Responsible AI practices. Google AI. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://ai.google/responsibility/responsible-ai-practices/

14. Gutiérrez, J. D. (2024). Consultation paper on AI regulation: Emerging approaches across the world. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000390979

15. Helbing, D., & Ienca, M. (2024). Why converging technologies need converging international regulation. Ethics and Information Technology, 26(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09756-8

16. Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). Artificial intelligence: The global landscape of ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

17. IEEE. (2021). IEEE 7000-2021: IEEE standard model process for addressing ethical concerns during system design. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/7000/6781

18. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

19. Karpov, V.E., Gotovtsev, P.M., & Royzenzon, G.V. (2018). On the issue of ethics and artificial intelligence systems. Filosofiya i obshchestvo, 2, 84–105. https://doi.org/10.30884/jfio/2018.02.07

20. Khabrieva, T. Ya. (2024). Legal problems of identification of artificial intelligence. Vestnik Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk, 94(7), 609–622. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869587324070015 [in Russian]

21. Kurmangali, M. Sh. (2023). International legal frameworks for regulating artificial intelligence: Challenges and prospects. In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Artificial Intelligence and Big Data in the Judicial and Law Enforcement System: Realities and the Demands of Time” (pp. 67–75). Academy of Law Enforcement Agencies under the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://academy-gp.kz/?p=17660&lang=ru

22. Leonov, V.A., Kashtanova, Y.V., & Lobacheva, A.S. (2021). Ethics of Artificial Intelligence: Problems and Initiatives in the Social Environment. Management of the Personnel and Intellectual Resources in Russia, 2(53), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.12737/2305-7807-2021-10-2-5-12

23. Lizikova, M.S. (2022). Ethical and legal issues of artificial intelligence development in business and other economic activities. Trudy Instituta Gosudarstva i Prava RAN, 17(1), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.35427/2073-4522-2022-17-1-lizikova

24. Meta. (2023). Meta AI governance and risk management framework. Meta AI. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://ai.meta.com

25. OECD. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449).Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0449

26. OECD. (2024). Assessing potential future artificial intelligence risks, benefits and policy imperatives. OECD. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://oecd.ai/en/ai-publications/futures

27. Pagallo, U. (2013). The laws of robots: Crimes, contracts, and torts. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6564-1

28. Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.190706

29. Petit, N. (2017). Law and regulation of artificial intelligence and robots: Conceptual framework and normative implications. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2931339

30. Qian, Y., Siau, K. L., & Nah, F. F. (2024). Societal impacts of artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal, and governance issues. Societal Impacts, 3, 100040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socimp.2024.100040

31. Rubtsova, L. (2025). Ethics of artificial intelligence: Challenges and solutions. Aktual’nye issledovaniya, 3(238), 95– 97. https://apni.ru/article/11164-etika-iskusstvennogo-intellekta-vyzovy-i-resheniya

32. Siau, K., & Wang, W. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI) ethics: Ethics of AI and ethical AI. Journal of Database Management, 31(2), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.4018/JDM.2020040105

33. Siau, K. L., Ding, C., Lin, F., & Nah, F. F. (2022). Identifying legal and ethical values in AI. In PACIS 2022 Proceedings. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2022/313

34. Slattery, P., Saeri, A. K., Grundy, E. A. C., Graham, J., Noetel, M., Uuk, R., Dao, J., Pour, S., Casper, S., & Thompson, N. (2024). The AI risk repository: A comprehensive meta-review, database, and taxonomy of risks from artificial intelligence. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2408.12622

35. Stanford University. (2023). AI index report 2023. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://hai.stanford.edu/aiindex/2023-ai-index-report

36. UNESCO. (2022). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137

37. U.S. Copyright Office. (2022). Second request for reconsideration for refusal to register A Recent Entrance to Paradise. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/docs/a-recententrance-to-paradise.pdf

38. WHO. (2021). Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: Executive summary. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240037403

39. WIPO. (2019). WIPO technology trends 2019: Artificial intelligence. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4386

40. WIPO. (2020). Revised issues paper on intellectual property policy and artificial intelligence. Retrieved April 30, 2026, from https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=499504