Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Next On AI's Agenda, Regulatory Scrutiny
There has been much hype around the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to transform life and work. Many industries are looking to implement the paradigm shift that this technology offers. While companies are eager to develop and implement AI solutions, ensuring compliance with laws and regulations can help companies avoid costly and disruptive enforcement action.
While some jurisdictions are enacting or proposing AI-specific regulation, many existing regulatory frameworks apply to new technologies, including antitrust. Companies may experience different potential antitrust risks depending on the type of AI technology and their use of that technology. Generative AI, technology that generates text and images based on prompts, may be the most popular form of AI technology at the moment as it is accessible to the general public through programs such as ChatGPT. However, there are also other forms of AI technology — e.g., pricing algorithms. Competition concerns related to the development of AI include access to key inputs, network effects, and other unfair methods of competition. Concerns related to the use of AI depends on the use case.
Generative AI
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) identified a number of potential antitrust risks that generative AI technology poses. Data is a key input for training and developing generative AI models, and the FTC views data as a potential barrier to entry for some companies since larger, existing companies may have access to more data that they own vs. new players to the market. As the FTC highlighted, analyzing the harm to competition that generative AI can cause will be complex because there are different stages in the development of an AI model (pre-training and fine-tuning) and different companies may be responsible for development of each of these stages.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.