“Hello, World!” We are proud to introduce our first monthly Newsletter!
Here you will be able to find a compendium with some of the latest news regarding technological developments, such as in the field of Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Data Market related legal issues.
From academic studies to official reports, we seek to present findings and perspectives among many legal peers.
“NFTs could have a generative art copyright problem” by Andres Guadamuz
Most of the writing about the legal issues surrounding NFTs has been rightly concentrated on two topics, what rights does the buyer acquire when purchasing a token, and the issue of copyright infringement. But I have been thinking for a while that perhaps one of the most interesting legal subjects is going relatively unnoticed, and it is the potential fact that a lot of NFTs may not even be protected under copyright in the first place.
In the latest episode of “Understanding IP Matters,” the podcast from the nonprofit Center for Intellectual Property Understanding, host Bruce Berman teases out how culture, IP and decentralization intersect in an interview with CoinDesk SVP Sam Ewen.
Ewen highlights in detail the very different approaches that three popular NFT projects — CryptoPunks, Bored Ape Yacht Club, and Nouns — have taken in regards to how the assets they’ve produced can and cannot be used, including monetization and royalties.
“AI Music Outputs: Challenges to the Copyright Legal Framework” by Oleksandr Bulayenko, João Pedro Quintais, Daniel Gervais, and Joost Poort
This report examines the application of EU copyright and related rights law to outputs generated by or with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, tools or techniques (AI outputs), with a focus on outputs in the musical domain. The Report examines the question: How can and should EU copyright and related rights law protect AI musical outputs? The interdisciplinary (legal and empirical) research involves: (i) analysing of the protection of AI outputs under EU copyright and related rights law; (ii) examining the attribution of authorship and ownership to (natural and legal) persons involved in the creation or production of AI outputs; (iii) proposing interpretative guidelines and policy recommendations on increasing legal certainty regarding the protection, authorship, and ownership of copyright and related rights over AI outputs, especially music outputs.
AI and GDPR
“Dutch scandal serves as a warning for Europe over risks of using algorithms” by Melissa Heikkilä
In 2019 it was revealed that the Dutch tax authorities had used a self-learning algorithm to create risk profiles in an effort to spot child care benefits fraud. Authorities penalized families over a mere suspicion of fraud based on the system’s risk indicators.
The Dutch tax authorities now face a new €3.7 million fine from the country’s privacy regulator. In a statement released April 12, the agency outlined several violations of the EU’s data protection rulebook, the General Data Protection Regulation, including not having a legal basis to process people’s data and hanging on to the information for too long.
“Regulating AI Through Data Privacy” by Eli MacKinnon and Dr. Jennifer King
There’s precedent for regulating AI with data privacy law, at least indirectly. The authors of Proposition 24 borrowed language on “automated decision making” (ADM) technologies directly from the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the E.U. law that governs how residents’ personal data can be collected and used.
More generally, though, given AI’s reliance on vast quantities of data, regulating AI through data privacy law is not only inevitable to some extent, but also a powerful regulatory strategy that lawmakers should carefully consider as they explore approaches to mitigating AI’s risks.
“EU and US on course to adopt Schrems II – compliant transfers framework” by Hogan Lovells
On March 25, 2022, The European Commission and the United States Government announced they had “agreed in principle” on a new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework (”Framework”) to enable flows of personal data from the EU to the U.S. in compliance with the adequacy standards set out by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”). The parties will now draft “legal documents” to reflect the agreed principles.
AI and Human Rights
“AI, human rights, democracy and the rule of law: A primer prepared for the Council of Europe” by Dr. David Leslie, Dr. Christopher Burr, Dr. Mhairi Aitken, Josh Cowls, Dr. Michael Katell and Morgan Briggs
The purpose of this primer, co-produced by The Alan Turing Institute and the Council of Europe, is to introduce the main concepts and principles presented in the CAHAI’s Feasibility Study for a general, non-technical audience. It also aims to provide some background information on the areas of AI innovation, human rights law, technology policy, and compliance mechanisms covered therein. In keeping with the Council of Europe’s commitment to broad multi-stakeholder consultations, outreach, and engagement, this primer has been designed to help facilitate the meaningful and informed participation of an inclusive group of stakeholders as the CAHAI seeks feedback and guidance regarding the essential issues raised by the Feasibility Study.
Legal Tech Policies
White paper “Regulatory Technology for the 21st Century” – World Economic Forum
Regulation is central to government’s management of complex systems. However, if designed or applied ineffectively, regulation may trigger significant losses, impose unnecessary financial burdens and stifle innovation. Regulatory Technology (RegTech), is the application of new technological solutions to in set, effectuate and meet regulatory requirements. This white paper explores the value of RegTech through a series of case studies and identifies the 7 common success factors that help define best practice deployment of RegTech. It provides government and business with a roadmap to start implementing RegTech without having to upend or rewrite entire regulatory and compliance frameworks to begin the journey.
“DMA: significant additions made it into the final text” by Luca Bertuzzi
The long-waited final text for the Digital Markets Act, seen by EURACTIV, contains some unexpected last-minute changes.
The EU co-legislators reached an agreement on the Digital Markets Act (DMA) on 24 March. Since then, stakeholders have been trying to get hold of the final text, fine-tuned in the utmost secrecy until it was finally circulated on Thursday (14 April).
The text will likely be presented to the Council’s competition working party on 28 April and approved by the EU ambassadors at the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) on 4 May.
Stay tuned for our next edition!