In the rapidly evolving world of artificial intelligence (AI), the need for regulation is undeniable. But, as the AI landscape continues to expand, the real challenge lies in deciphering where to begin. The scope of AI operations is so vast that it leaves policymakers, high-level politicians, and technology corporations grappling with where to draw the regulatory lines. While there may be seemingly simple solutions, the devil is in the details.
AI regulation within the bounds of existing law
When considering the need for AI regulations, it’s crucial to recognize that the fundamental purpose of law is to provide redress for injury, loss, or the enforcement of legal entitlements. These entitlements encompass a wide range of areas, from property rights to privacy. Therefore, any regulatory framework for artificial intelligence must align seamlessly with existing laws.
As it stands, the state of AI regulation remains at square one, with politicians and tech giants filling the media space with buzzwords but offering little concrete action. But, practical applications of AI laws should focus on several critical aspects, including:
Defining Artificial Intelligence: To regulate AI effectively, a clear legal definition of artificial intelligence is essential. Without a universally accepted understanding of what AI entails, crafting appropriate regulations becomes nearly impossible.
Privacy and Security: Protecting individuals’ privacy and ensuring the security of AI systems are paramount. AI laws must establish robust safeguards in these areas to mitigate potential risks.
Ownership and Liability: When AI generates vast amounts of information, issues of ownership and liability arise. Personal information is a form of personal property, and safeguarding legal rights concerning this property is imperative.
Risk Management: Different AI services carry varying levels of risk. Effective AI laws should account for these differences and provide guidelines for risk management based on the type of AI service offered.
Third-Party Interactions: As AI interacts with user-generated information, the legal framework should address third-party involvement to ensure accountability and protection of user data.
Service Provider Obligations: Professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and accountants using AI must adhere to confidentiality requirements outlined in AI laws.
Legal Cover for Hacks: AI-related security breaches and major hacks must be met with effective legal coverage and financial liability solutions.
The critical point is that many of these legal requirements are already covered by existing laws, and AI regulations should not conflict with them. This complexity raises questions about the nature of AI-generated information and its legal status.
AI’s unique legal challenges
Beyond the fundamental legal issues, AI introduces its own set of challenges. AI systems can create situations where nobody is clearly at fault, potentially leading to disputes over liability. In the face of such complexities, insurance issues may become a significant concern, and resolving legal complaints may prove time-consuming.
Some experts argue that a distinct category of laws tailored specifically for AI may be necessary. The specialization required to address AI-related legal matters is likened to fields such as medicine and forensics. Central to these new laws is the concept of “evidence.”
In AI laws, the term “evidence” assumes a central role. Establishing evidence standards and ensuring accessibility for analysis purposes are essential. This process is akin to the traditional concept of “discovery” in legal cases. But, the scale and complexity of AI-generated data present unique challenges.
Courts will grapple with determining the acceptability and admissibility of evidence in AI-related lawsuits, with billions of lines of code potentially complicating matters further. An adversarial environment may introduce dysfunction into the process.
Massive administrative hurdles for the courts
The sheer scale and scope of AI-related lawsuits will pose administrative challenges for the courts. Handling potentially millions of cases will require a tremendous amount of time, resources, and manpower, which may be unworkable.
A potential solution to streamline the process could involve revisiting the legal theory of “uncontested evidence,” potentially saving both time and resources.
The regulation of artificial intelligence is a complex, multifaceted challenge that policymakers, tech giants, and legal experts must confront. Balancing the need for new AI-specific laws with the existing legal framework, managing evidence, and addressing administrative hurdles are all critical aspects of shaping a regulatory landscape that can effectively govern the rapidly evolving world of AI. The choice is clear: get AI regulation right or face a future mired in legal complexities.
