Colorado is the latest state to introduce a bill focused on consumer protection issues when companies develop AI tools. The bill imposes obligations on developers and deployers of AI systems. Additionally, the bill provides an affirmative defense for a developer or deployer if the developer or deployer of the high-risk system or generative system involved in a potential violation: i) has implemented and maintained a program that complies with a nationally or internationally recognized risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems that the bill or the attorney general designates; and ii) the developer or deployer takes specified measures to discover and correct violations of the bill. The obligations imposed adhere to responsible AI policy, including adopting and documenting policies to avoid algorithmic discrimination, requiring transparency and documentation of the design, data and testing used to build AI tools, avoiding copyright infringement, marking and disclosing to consumers that the synthetic content output was generated by AI tools. The bill also requires disclosure of risks, notifications if the tool makes a consequential decision concerning a consumer and other disclosures.Continue Reading Colorado Introduces an AI Consumer Protection Bill

The USPTO issued guidance on February 6, 2024 that clarified existing rules and policies and discussed how to apply them when AI is used in the drafting of submissions to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). As a follow up, the USPTO has now published additional guidance in the Federal Register on some important issues that patent and trademark professionals, innovators, and entrepreneurs must navigate while using artificial intelligence (AI) in matters before the USPTO. The guidance recognizes that practitioners use AI to prepare and prosecute patent and trademark applications. It reminds individuals involved in proceedings before the USPTO of the pertinent rules and policies, identifies some risks associated with the use of AI, and provides suggestions to mitigate those risks. It states that while the USPTO is committed to maximizing AI’s benefits, the USPTO recognizes the need, through technical mitigations and human governance, to cabin the risks arising from the use of AI in practice before the USPTO. The USPTO has determined that existing rules protect the USPTO’s ecosystem against such potential perils and thus no new rules are currently being proposed.Continue Reading USPTO Issues Additional Guidance on Use of AI Tools in Connection with USPTO Matters

The NY State Bar Association (NYSBA) Task Force on Artificial Intelligence has issued a nearly 80 page report (Report) and recommendations on the legal, social and ethical impact of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI on the legal profession. This detailed Report also reviews AI-based software, generative AI technology and other machine learning tools that may enhance the profession, but which also pose risks for individual attorneys’ understanding of new, unfamiliar technology, as well as courts’ concerns about the integrity of the judicial process. It also makes recommendations for NYSBA adoption, including proposed guidelines for responsible AI use. This Report is perhaps the most comprehensive report to date by a state bar association. It is likely this Report will stimulate much discussion.Continue Reading NY State Bar Association Joins Florida and California on AI Ethics Guidance – Suggests Some Surprising Implications

AI tools such as Chat GPT and Otter are becoming common programs that employees use to help streamline business tasks. Otter, for example, is an AI Meeting Assistant that automatically transcribes and summarizes meetings in real time, records audio, captures slides, extracts action items, and generates content such as e-mails and status updates. While tools like Otter may provide quick answers or help synthesize a large volume of information, employers and employees alike should be mindful of the types of information fed to (and possibly stored in) AI programs. The use of an AI tool to, for example, record a meeting that discusses company confidential information, can give rise to claims of trade secret misappropriation.Continue Reading Mind Your Audience: Disclosure of Confidential Information to AI Programs Can Give Rise to Trade Secret Misappropriation Claims

The AI landscape is rapidly changing. To keep you up to date on the fast breaking legal updates in the AI space, we will be providing weekly updates summarizing significant news and legal developments, ranging from AI lawsuits and enforcement actions to legislation and regulations. Below are some highlights of key developments and articles you can view to learn more.Continue Reading AI Legal Updates

The SEC has charged and settled claims with two Investment advisers with making false and misleading statements about their use of artificial intelligence (AI). The SEC found that Delphia (USA) Inc. and Global Predictions Inc. marketed to their clients and prospective clients that they were using AI in certain ways when, in fact, they were not. SEC chair Gensler noted that when new technologies come along, they create buzz from investors and false claims by those purporting to use those new technologies. He admonished investment advisers to not mislead the public by saying they are using an AI model when they are not and that such “AI washing” hurts investors. The companies paid $400,000 in civil penalties.Continue Reading SEC Cracks Down on Over-Hyped AI Claims – Director Says This is Just the Beginning

In a prior article Training AI Models – Just Because It’s “Your” Data Doesn’t Mean You Can Use It, we addressed how many companies are sitting on a trove of customer data and are realizing that this data can be valuable to train AI models. We noted, however, that the use of customer data in a manner that exceeds or otherwise is not permitted by the privacy policy in effect at the time the data was collected could be problematic. As companies think through these issues, some have (or will) update their Terms of Service (TOS) and/or privacy policy to address this. Before companies do this, it is critical to make sure they do not jump out of the frying pan and into the fire.Continue Reading FTC Warns About Changing Terms of Service or Privacy Policy to Train AI on Previously Collected Data

On January 26, 2024, the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (“FedRAMP”) published a draft Emerging Technology Prioritization Framework developed in response to President Biden’s Executive Order 14110 on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (previously analyzed by our colleague here and discussed in a flash briefing available here). The Executive Order charged FedRAMP with developing a framework to prioritize Emerging Technologies in the FedRAMP authorization process, starting with generative AI.Continue Reading Emerging AI Landscape: FedRAMP Publishes Draft Emerging Technology Prioritization Framework in Response to Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence

Aiming to curb the use of AI, voice cloning technology in robocall scams, on February 8, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a unanimous declaratory ruling prohibiting unsolicited robocalls with voices generated by AI. With its ruling, which took effect immediately, the FCC made clear that the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) – meant to curb junk phone calls – also outlaws unsolicited AI-generated robocalls.Continue Reading Battling the Robocall Onslaught: The FCC’s Strategic Measures Against AI-Driven Scams