Nicola Lettieri
I'm researcher at INAPP (Rome), adjunct professor of Advanced Legal Informatics at the University of Sannio (Benevento) and member of the ISISLab research lab (University of Salerno - Department of Computer Science).
I hold a degree in Law (University “Federico II”, Naples) and a PhD in Legal Informatics (University of Florence).
From 2002 to 2007 I've been working at the Institute of Legal Information Theory and Techniques of the Italian National Research Council.
In 2011 I was Associate researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Techniques working at the Laboratory of Agent Based Social Simulation.
From 2010 to 2012 I was member of the Steering Committee and Secretary of the Italian Cognitive Science Society (AISC) and currently I'm co-editor of the international series “Law Science
Technology”.
I'm interested in exploring how the intersection between law, science and computation can provide legal scientists with a deeper understanding of the empirical and natural dimension of socio-legal phenomena. My attention is focused on agent-based modeling, network analysis and visual analytics and their application as tools for legal analysis, policy modeling and regulatory impact analysis.
Supervisors: Domenico Parisi and Dino Giuli
I hold a degree in Law (University “Federico II”, Naples) and a PhD in Legal Informatics (University of Florence).
From 2002 to 2007 I've been working at the Institute of Legal Information Theory and Techniques of the Italian National Research Council.
In 2011 I was Associate researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Techniques working at the Laboratory of Agent Based Social Simulation.
From 2010 to 2012 I was member of the Steering Committee and Secretary of the Italian Cognitive Science Society (AISC) and currently I'm co-editor of the international series “Law Science
Technology”.
I'm interested in exploring how the intersection between law, science and computation can provide legal scientists with a deeper understanding of the empirical and natural dimension of socio-legal phenomena. My attention is focused on agent-based modeling, network analysis and visual analytics and their application as tools for legal analysis, policy modeling and regulatory impact analysis.
Supervisors: Domenico Parisi and Dino Giuli
less
InterestsView All (38)
Uploads
In questo scenario, alle prospettive di efficienza delle “tecnoregole” si affianca il rischio di ingiustizie frutto di processi algoritmici imperscrutabili nei cui confronti è difficile qualsiasi forma di dissenso.
Il volume esamina presupposti, forme e strategie di resistenza all’ingiustizia algoritmica. Lo scopo è quello di offrire alla riflessione giusfilosofica spunti utili a svolgere un ruolo di analisi critica e di indirizzo indispensabile per evitare un mutamento guidato dalla sola evoluzione tecnica.
In questo scenario, alle prospettive di efficienza delle “tecnoregole” si affianca il rischio di ingiustizie frutto di processi algoritmici imperscrutabili nei cui confronti è difficile qualsiasi forma di dissenso.
Il volume esamina presupposti, forme e strategie di resistenza all’ingiustizia algoritmica. Lo scopo è quello di offrire alla riflessione giusfilosofica spunti utili a svolgere un ruolo di analisi critica e di indirizzo indispensabile per evitare un mutamento guidato dalla sola evoluzione tecnica.
Even if dating back and already resulted in countless experiences, the project of a computational enhancement of legal science is not a trivial matter: its implications should not be taken all for granted, especially if we want to avoid a merely technology-driven approach to research. Time is ripe to deepen our reflection on the preconditions, processes, and consequences of the use computation as a scientific tool.
My goal is to draw the attention to these issues also by suggesting a way to interpret computation in the legal field. The contribution is structured in three parts. After a brief reference to personal research experiences, the first part dwells on the epistemic implications of computation also in the light of reflections from the philosophy of science and of computing.
The second point tries to draw up the scientific and cultural “frame of reference” that should inspire the computational evolution of law. A crucial role is assigned, in this vein, to empirical legal research, to complexity theory, and to computational social science, the emerging research paradigm providing new opportunities for a deeper understanding of social life.
The third part sketches the idea of a “computationally enhanced” legal empiricism, a research perspective aiming to explore the complexity of the legal phenomenon understood in all its factual (biological, cognitive, social, institutional) dimensions. As we’ll emphasize, this could extend and complement the analysis of formal expressions of law (rules, case law, legal literature) usually studied by legal scholars. The choice might result in an opportunity from two points of view. On the one hand, it could enhance with new perspectives the scientific investigation of the phenomena populating the legal universe. On the other hand, thanks to a more truthful view of the dynamics occurring at individual and collective level, it could turn into a more effective and scientifically grounded regulation of social life.
The ongoing process is rising many challenges in the legal field. Law has to define and refine regulations allowing, on the one hand, to exploit the opportunities inherent to data analytics and, on the other hand, to contrast threats like privacy breaches, identity theft and fraud, new forms of redlining and ‘Big Brotherishness of various kinds’.
The presentation is split in two parts. The first part is a state of the art examining the keystones of the legal framework so far defined at international and European level to cope with Big Data legal implications.
The second part is a brief analysis of application and research issues. The data deluge is driving the emergence of innovative tools that are not only going to affect many sectors of legal practice but are also producing a paradigm shift in the way legally relevant phenomena are studied, understood and predicted.
Far from being simply juxtaposed, the two parts of the talk are strictly intertwined as the creation of new tools and applications is in turn a cause of (or a solution for) regulation issues.