Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Employers that use artificial intelligence — and developers that create AI systems — could be subject to extensive new laws under several bills introduced by federal legislators. While much of the existing legal landscape on AI centers on broad, overarching principles, Congress has been considering bills that hone in on more specific issues like the workplace. We'll outline the three federal bills that employers should care about most, covering issues ranging from overreliance on automated decision systems — or "robot bosses" — to workplace surveillance — or "spying bosses." As we are approaching the tail end of the 118th Congress, it is unlikely that the legislation mentioned will pass in its current form in 2024. That being said, we expect some or all of the bills to be re-introduced in the next legislative session.
Over the past several years, the federal government has ramped up its efforts to govern the development, design, and usage of AI. Here's a sample of the laws, guidance, and standards already in place:
1. No Robot Bosses Act, S. 2419, introduced by Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA).
The aptly named "No Robot Bosses Act" would ban employers from relying exclusively on automated decision systems (ADS) to make "employment-related decisions" — which is broadly defined to include decisions at the recruiting stage through termination and everything in between (such as pay, scheduling, and benefits). The bill would protect not only employees and applicants but also independent contractors.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
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.