Topic: Artificial intelligence

The legal industry is on the brink of transformation with the integration of Generative AI (GenAI). Understanding which AI solutions fit your practice is crucial to enhancing productivity.

AI adoption must now be on every board room and executive team’s agenda as an emerging area of risk and regulatory focus. This issue has been given further impetus by a number of key developments across Australia’s multi-jurisdictional landscape.

This webinar will look at the legal risks to consider when developing and using AI in the UK in 2025, including considerations for generative AI tools. It will provide an update on UK AI policy and new laws proposed. It will also look at existing cross-sectoral and sectoral laws and how they apply to AI, and the application of the EU AI Act to UK businesses.

n response to the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, the Cyberspace Administration of China (the CAC) recently issued two draft regulations for public consultation: Measures for Labelling Artificial Intelligence-Generated or Synthetic Content (the Draft AI Labelling Measures) and Cybersecurity technology—Labelling method for content generated by artificial intelligence (the Draft Labelling Method Standard).

On 5 November 2024, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) opened its AI Input Zone, through which it is inviting stakeholders to provide their views on current and future uses of artificial intelligence (AI) in UK financial services, as well as the financial services regulatory framework.

The privacy-cyber world seems preoccupied with issues related to the nexus between personal data and AI. Those issues, although important, are dwarfed by a more pressing and fundamental question: can we get AI to do useful things reliably and accurately in the realm of predicting significant human outcomes, such as health, criminal propensity, credit risk etc. (“Predictive AI”)? Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor, two luminaries in the AI field from Princeton University, suggest the answer is “No” and they make their case in AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What it Can’t and How to Tell the Difference. Although we very much recommend the book—as it is excellent—we think the thesis is too pessimistic. Companies should not “throw the baby out with the bathwater” but instead distill the precepts that will allow for development of a more rigorous predictive AI that avoids known pitfalls.

Lord Clement-Jones has introduced a Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Private Members' Bill (Bill) into the House of Lords. Currently at the second reading stage, the Bill addresses increasing reliance on AI and algorithmic systems by public authorities in the UK, and aims to mitigate the potential risks associated with their use. The Bill would establish significant new guidelines for the development, deployment, and monitoring of such systems.

On September 17, 2024, California enacted two laws relating to artificial intelligence and its use in digital replicas. The two laws relate to employment law (AB 1836) and contracts against public policy (AB 2602). The unauthorized digital replicas law (AB 2602) goes into effect on January 1, 2025, but AB 1836 does not take effect until January 1, 2026.

On 25 September 2024, the Bank of England (BoE) announced that it is establishing an artificial intelligence (AI) consortium, which will act as a platform for public-private engagement to gather input from stakeholders on the capabilities, development and use of AI in UK financial services.

In 2024, many organisations have been eager to look at how they can use the data they hold to debut or build on their artificial intelligence (AI) programme. Many are looking to use that data to train AI models, or fine-tune third-party models. That data will almost certainly include personal data, meaning that the processing must comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU or UK.