نشریه حقوق فناوری های نوین
سال سوم شماره 2 (پیاپی 6، پاییز و زمستان 1401)

Artificial intelligence in today's world of technology, by proving its efficiency and capabilities, has been able to create the fourth revolution and, like a huge and powerful wave, has covered all areas of human life and has helped or replaced many jobs. One of the areas of application of artificial intelligence in criminal investigations is to detect crime, identify the accused, prove the crime and identify the victim. This will help improve and expedite the performance of the police, increase the accuracy of criminal investigations, and play an effective role in preventing crime and high-risk behaviours in society. It will also play an effective role in implementing preventive justice and creating security in the community, and improving judicial decisions to grant arbitrary institutions. This article presents and analyzes the capabilities and capacities of artificial intelligence in criminal investigations and similar examples used worldwide to prove the necessity of using artificial intelligence in criminal investigations and the necessary actions and planning by policymakers and Governments in this area. The main topics discussed include the performance of artificial intelligence in crime detection and prediction, the risk capacity of criminals and the ability to apply arbitrary institutions and the introduction of artificial intelligence programs implemented worldwide in the field of criminal investigation.

Despite the development of new technologies, intellectual property rights have gone through many ups and downs, and sometimes there have been changes in accordance with these technologies. One of the aspects that needs more study and investigation in accordance with new technologies is the author's moral rights. Despite this neglect, there has always been a conflict between the interests of authors and the owners of economic and financial institutes, such as the media and companies active in the field of copyright, over the limitation or non-limitation of moral rights. For this purpose, the present research tries to answer the above question with an analytical-descriptive method and by studying the challenges of the moral rights of the author in the face of new information and communication technologies. And in the end he concludes; while some creations created by new technologies should be excluded from the protection of moral rights, the existence of moral rights in these creations should not be completely denied. And the author's moral rights in this territory should more than anything seek to create a balance between the author's rights and the specific requirements of these technologies.

The future contract is one of the financial derivative instruments whose value is determined during the validity period of the contract according to the value of the underlying asset. Futures are considered temporary contracts. In recent years, with the development and prosperity of the cryptocurrency market, a new type of futures contract has become common in the world's major exchanges, which is perpetual and has no expiration date. Traders in the perpetual futures market can keep their Long or short position open for as long as they desire by depositing the required margin and adhering to the funding system. The transformation of the futures contract's structure from temporary to perpetual, and from stock markets to exchanges, has revealed the contract's new legal and financial face. The structure of this contract has been reviewed in this article while outlining the concept and differences between perpetual futures and other futures contracts. The validity of this contract is then explored using legal and jurisprudential standards, and it is concluded that the perpetual future contract is invalid for a variety of reasons, including uncertainty, usury and formality.

The right to use new technologies is one of the fundamental rights and several legal documents from the European Declaration of Digital Rights and the principles of the Digital Decade and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Human Rights. Among these new technologies is artificial intelligence technology, which has had a pervasive impact on multiple generations of human rights, and one of its functions is to use this intelligence in the process of judicial proceedings. The current research has investigated the different forms of using artificial intelligence in the process of judicial proceedings and its principles and requirements with the descriptive analytical research method and the use of library tools. The results of this research indicate that artificial intelligence can be used as practical tools, tools (assistant judge) and decision-making tools (independent judge) in the judicial process, and the change in the algorithm designed for artificial artificial tools such as law is equality. And non-discrimination, independence and impartiality and institutional transparency and make this algorithm fair, artificial intelligence can achieve a fair trial.

The Internet of Things is the technology of connecting things, humans and animals in a network that has wide dimensions in current human life. Its importance has increased as the issue of protecting people's rights, such as protecting their privacy, has grown. Accordingly, this paper's fundamental question is the relationship between the right to privacy as a human right and the right to the internet of things in Iran's legal system. The right to privacy is one of the first-generation rights that conflict with the right to enjoy the Internet of Things. The second right relates to economic and social rights, whose proof was disputed under international law. In addition, the rank of this right was lower compared to other examples of social and economic rights. In the future, it may be possible to ignore the fulfilment of the right to privacy if it becomes one of the necessities of human life. The content of the right to privacy in the area of the Internet of Things included the management and monitoring of one's data on the one hand and, on the other hand, compliance with security in the three areas: security of the Internet of Things systems and related systems against hacking and intrusion, security and observance of the principles during the legal collection of data and security during the storage and use of data. In addition, they should observe legal and ethical principles during collecting and using personal data in Iran. Other examples of violating individuals' privacy rights in the field of the Internet of Things in Iran are insulting people, obtaining unauthorised access to data on the Internet of Things system, making data publicly available, deleting or destroying data, disrupting or disabling Internet of Things systems, etc. We conclude that approving laws and cultural policies is the best solution to support this right

The most common strategy to prevent cybercrime in Iran is to refine content. However, filtering is not consistent with criminological knowledge approaches and contradicts the natural rights of citizens, including the right to liberty, equality and the right to security. The findings of this research show that the high use of filtering results in "civil disobedience," "society laziness in protecting morality," "generalisation of crime," and "juvenile delinquency and victimisation". The findings of this research show that the high use of filtering results in "civil disobedience," "society laziness in protecting morality," "generalisation of crime," and "juvenile delinquency and victimisation". There are already some levels of these unfavourable outcomes in Iran's cyberspace. The conclusion and theory of this article is that sustainable prevention of crime in cyberspace is realised when crime prevention is planned in a "right-wing paradigm" through "community measures" and with respect for individual rights and freedoms. Therefore, it is suggested that by moderating the policy of filtering in the current way, a participatory prevention pattern is implemented so that citizens of cyberspace follow the issue of prevention as a right (the right to cultural participation).

Environmental protection is an international issue because it concerns all countries, regardless of their size, level of development or ideology. The principles of environmental law are generally enshrined in international law through peaceful relations and international jurisprudence. The purpose of this study is to provide a model for the principles of environmental law. After reviewing the theoretical foundations and taking opinions from experts, the issue was categorized into six indicators (principle of coping with environmental damage at source, principle of sustainable development, principle of prevention, precautionary principle, principle of evaluation, principle of necessity of environmental protection); Then, a structured matrix questionnaire was developed to determine the interrelationships of these indicators. The data obtained from the questionnaire were analyzed using interpretive structural modeling and plotted at five levels in an interactive network, as a result of which the "Principle of Prevention" index was at the highest level. Therefore, scientific experience and findings indicate that preventive measures related to the environment should be considered as a "golden rule" for both environmental and economic reasons, as this ensures that no damage to the environment. This action is also economically justifiable due to the high cost of compensation.

The right to economic development is considered another manifestation of the development issue in international law literature.  It is considered one of the fundamental rights of governments and the natural result of their sovereignty, and one of the rights upon which the United Nations Charter is based, by which the governments of the world commit to solving economic, social, cultural, and development-related issues in cooperation. Despite this, the question raised here is, what is the nature of this commitment and duty of governments towards the right of economic development of other countries, especially regarding the development of peaceful nuclear knowledge and technology? According to our results, despite the claims of developed countries that there are no binding international laws or conventions stipulating the commitment to cooperation and assistance to developing countries, developing countries have a right to development, and although the obligations of the charter are outlined in a general way, as long as the economic activities of the countries, including in the field of nuclear energy, do not pose a threat to the peace and security of other nations, they may be considered positive obligations. The development of peaceful nuclear technologies and the transfer of knowledge to developing countries are the responsibility of nuclear and developed countries. Based on this, the present article, with a descriptive and analytical approach, seeks to explore and give a detailed answer to the above question.

Digital platforms, as a complex type of businesses in the digital economy, provide their services all over the world. Sometimes they try to provide services to users from other parts of the world and have the position of being an intermediary in the interactions and communications. Therefore, with various goals, including controlling the activities of users interacting with each other or with the platform, they regulate users' activities in the platform and call it self-regulation. The place of this self-regulation in the legal system and the effects it has on people in different situations are essential for policymakers and regulators, which cannot be examined except through the precise understanding of the legal nature of this self-regulation and determining the rights and duties of stakeholders related to a platform. In this work, by using the descriptive-analytical method while knowing the digital platforms, various methods of self-regulation by their owners have been investigated to be able to answer that, what is the nature of this self-regulation in our legal system. All kinds of self-regulation methods can be considered as an agreement between users with each other or with platform owners, which, of course, has a different place in the legal system in different situations depending on the type of practices and technical infrastructure.

"Metaverse" or the Second life, as a combination of the real and virtual worlds, besides creating new facilities and opportunities in various fields, will also bring challenges to the people and the states. Legal issues will also challenge a large range of interactions between individuals in the metaverse. This essay first addresses the main question of whether the objects in the metaverse can be owned while opening a chapter on the opinion of jurists. In favour of the ownership of virtual objects, this article has presented four theories of ownership: Locke’s work theory, Hegel's personality theory, Bentham's utilitarianism theory and Ledgerwood's theft deterrence theory. The matter has been dealt with according to jurisprudence and legal principles too. This approach has been followed in that virtual objects can be owned with the assumption that they are property in view of the custom.

In obtaining digital evidence, one has to take many different steps. Regarding this, criminal systems still have not agreed upon a unique standard, particularly in the case of digital evidences. Digital forensics, as a science concerning the processes of obtaining evidence, proposes anti-forensic methods that, if they are paid attention to, countries can make their laws more technical in terms of content. Unfortunately, digital forensics does not have a favourable situation in terms of theory and practice. In this respect, the weakness of Acts and instruments such as the Iranian criminal procedure Act and the regulations regarding collecting electronic evidence is apparent. This essay has examined the challenges in digital forensics with a descriptive approach and seeks to approximate them by applying the rules of Iran and English criminal systems.

Due to the widespread dependence of all human affairs on cyberspace and the Internet, the risk of cyber attacks threatens international peace and security more than ever‏.‏ From time to time, some news is spread in the media and social networks that a cyber attack has been carried out against a state. Still, due to the complexities of cyberspace, it is difficult to determine the perpetrator of the cyber attack‏.‏ What can act as a strong barrier against the state’s violations of the rules and principles of international law is the rules of the international responsibility of the states‏‏.‏ Currently, there are two standards of responsibility for states against cyber attacks of Non-State Actors, one of which is the standard of effective control, and the other is the standard of general control‏.‏ In this article, the advantages and disadvantages of these two standards for determining the international responsibility of states for cyber attacks by Non-State Actors are discussed. It is concluded that due to the special characteristics of cyber technologies‏, these two standards are not appropriate to prove the responsibility of states for Non-state actors’ cyber attacks. The standard of due diligence must be considered by states because, based on the characteristics of this standard, it seems easier to prove the international responsibility of states against cyber attacks by Non-state Actors.