This chapter shows that the book’s core transactional techniques are viable under existing law, and it defends the book’s analysis as a matter of statutory interpretation. It also provides various alternative transactional means to achieve similar goals, both as practical alternatives and to show the conceptual robustness of the book’s main proposed transactional technique.

This chapter lays out a transactional technique by which any existing natural or legal person can create an autonomous organization – specifically, an LLC with zero members controlled, as a matter of internal governance, only by software. The technique works under existing law and can be used with software without regard for the software’s “intelligence.”

This chapter introduces the book and provides several motivating examples for autonomous organization. It also explains the scope, goals, and layout of the book.

The topic of ‘trade and technology’ usually gives rise to discussions of the ways in which new technologies might be traded, and the limitation of current trade rules in adapting to rapidly changing innovations. In contrast, this chapter asks a fundamentally different question – what opportunities will technology present to change the modes and methods by which trade regulation is achieved? Specifically, the chapter considers how the World Trade Organization (WTO), or a future trade organisation, might itself take advantage of technology to restructure how it manages trade and fulfils its mandate. That mandate includes serving as a facilitator of trade agreements and market access negotiations, a forum for resolution of trade disputes, and a watchdog for national trade policies. It argues that technologies such as artificial intelligence, distributed ledger technologies, and the Internet of Things can be used in order to streamline and improve a range of WTO processes, particularly dispute settlement, negotiations, notifications, and monitoring.

This chapter highlights “agreements” and other legal instruments as the most convenient and functional mechanism by which existing private law can recognize algorithms. Algorithms with verifiable state can be the basis for contractual terms and conditions and can thereby be recognized by legal processes. This general mechanism is a better practical and conceptual fit than other proposed legal treatments for algorithms, such as the common law of agency (i.e., vicarious action).

Governments increasingly adopt various measures to achieve compliance with data ethics principles to reduce misuse of data-driven technologies and promote good digital and data governance. However, some of these measures restrict cross-border trade in digital technologies and services, thereby implicating various obligations contained in international trade agreements. This chapter investigates if international trade agreements (focusing on the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO)) provide sufficient policy space to governments to implement data ethics-related measures, despite their potential trade-restrictive impact. It argues that general exceptions (GATS art. XIV) can be interpreted in an evolutionary manner to cover several data ethics concerns. However, in doing so, WTO tribunals are likely to face uncertainties due to the regulatory diversity across countries. In particular, examining the core rationale underlying data ethics-related measures, determining their technological efficacy and identifying the least burdensome and trade-restrictive means to realise policy goals enshrined in data ethics frameworks remain highly challenging. In light of these uncertainties, this chapter recommends that the WTO must better accommodate evolving norms, standards and best practices on data ethics of other international institutions and relevant transnational and multistakeholder bodies.

Automated driving systems (ADSs) are growing exponentially as one of the most promising AI applications. ADSs promise to transform ways in which people commute and connect with one another, altering the conventional division of labor, social interactions, and provision of services. Regulatory issues such as testing and safety, cybersecurity, connectivity, liability, and insurance are driving governments to establish comprehensive and consistent policy frameworks. Of key importance is ADSs’ ethical challenges. How to align ADS development with fundamental ethical principles embedded in a society remains a difficult question. The “Trolley Problem” aptly demonstrates such tension. While it seems essential to have rules and standards reflecting local values and contexts, potential conflicts and duplication may have serious trade implications in terms of how ADS is designed, manufactured, distributed, serviced, and driven across borders. This chapter examines the multifaceted, complex regulatory issues related to ADS and uses the most controversial, ethical dimension to analyze the tensions between the protection of public morals and trade secrets under the WTO. It unpacks three levels of challenges that may translate into a regulatory dilemma in light of WTO members’ rights and obligations under GATT, TBT Agreement, and the TRIPS Agreement and identifies possible venues of reconfiguration.

The legal and practical consequences of flexible statutes, like those that authorize the creation of legal organizations, depend not just on their conventional uses but on creative development in the private legal transactions that they enable. Sound but creative uses of generative statutes, like LLC statutes, often lead the law to interesting places. Autonomous organizations, which give software all the functional capabilities of legal persons, are one such interesting destination.

This chapter uses the case of CAV standards to explore how this “disruptive innovation” may alter the boundaries of international trade agreements. Amid the transition to a driverless future, the transformative nature of disruptive innovation renders the interpretation and application of trade rules challenging. The chapter focuses on two issues – the goods/services boundaries, and the public/private sector boundaries. Considering the data-driven business models and the integrated technical features, CAV-related safety standards may disrupt the scope of coverage of the TBT Agreement. As CAVs evolve from level 0 to level 5, how should CAV standards be reclassified? In addition, for levels 1–4, in which humans and CAVs are co-drivers, the industry-led voluntary standards provide a baseline for judges in the evaluation of appropriate levels and evidence of CAV safety prior to deployment, which may become a strong incentive for CAV manufacturers to comply with “guidance,” “best practice,” or “codes of conduct.” To what extent should a WTO tribunal assume the responsibility of members with regard to CAV safety standards prepared and published by a private entity? The development of disruptive innovation involves changes in governance frameworks and calls for new governance approaches that break the boundaries of existing trade disciplines.

This chapter proceeds in four parts. The first part reviews the development of the Internet and e-commerce in China, as well as China’s experiences on e-commerce issues in WTO and beyond, especially in free trade agreements. The second part discusses the history of the e-commerce negotiations in the WTO, from the 1998 E-commerce Declaration and the Doha Declaration, to the joint statement in 2017 and the launch of the plurilateral Joint Statement Initiative negotiations in 2019, with China joining at the last minute. The third part analyses in detail China’s three submissions in the negotiations, as well as the most problematic issues for China. The chapter concludes with reflections on how the negotiations will unfold, especially how the main sticking points in China’s internet and data regulatory regime could be addressed. Why was China reluctant to participate in the e-commerce negotiation at first? Why did it change its position in 2019? What will be the main issues in the negotiation? What are the positions of China and how will its participation shape the negotiation? By answering these questions, this chapter provides a critical analysis of the data regulation of China, a world leader in the AI and data-driven economy.