{"id":264,"date":"2024-09-18T16:22:17","date_gmt":"2024-09-18T20:22:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/?p=264"},"modified":"2024-09-18T16:22:18","modified_gmt":"2024-09-18T20:22:18","slug":"the-ai-update-september-18-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/2024\/09\/18\/the-ai-update-september-18-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"The AI Update | September 18, 2024"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"alignleft\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"150\" height=\"60\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/63\/2023\/04\/DM-AI-Update-e1681141844877.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-96\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>#HelloWorld. It\u2019s been a long summer hiatus. Please bear with us as we play our way back into shape. In this issue, we recap the summer highlights of AI legal and regulatory developments. Of course, the EU AI Act, but not just the EU AI Act. California continues to enact headline-grabbing AI legislation, content owners continue to ink deals with AI model developers, and what would a month in the federal courts be without another AI lawsuit or two. Let\u2019s stay smart together. (<a href=\"mailto:AI-Update@duanemorris.com?subject=Subscribe%20to%20the%20mailing%20list%20&amp;body=Please%20add%20me%20to%20The%20AI%20Update%20list.\">Subscribe to the mailing list<\/a>\u00a0to receive future issues.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The EU AI Act<\/strong>. Finally. On August 1, 2024, the EU AI Act, originally proposed in April 2021, officially <a href=\"https:\/\/commission.europa.eu\/news\/ai-act-enters-force-2024-08-01_en#:~:text=On%201%20August%202024%2C%20the,and%20deployment%20in%20the%20EU.\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">entered<\/a> into force. This regulation is so extensive and so multifaceted that trying to recap it here would be futile. But there are two key upcoming dates to keep in mind:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>On February 2, 2025, the Act\u2019s rules regarding \u201cProhibited AI Practices\u201d (Article 5) go into effect. These apply to AI systems that use \u201csubliminal techniques\u201d; that exploit people\u2019s \u201cvulnerabilities\u201d based on \u201cage, disability or a specific social or economic situation\u201d; that create \u201csocial scores\u201d based on \u201csocial behavior\u201d or \u201cpersonality characteristics\u201d; that make predictions about a person\u2019s \u201ccriminal activity\u201d; that scrape images \u201cfrom the internet or CCTV footage\u201d in untargeted fashion; or that undertake \u201cbiometric categorisation\u201d or \u201cbiometric identification,\u201d except for law enforcement purposes.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>On August 2, 2025, the Act\u2019s rules on \u201cGeneral-Purpose AI Models\u201d come into force (generally, Chapter 5, including Articles 53-54). These regulations were a late addition, spurred by the attention blitz LLMs and foundation models received after ChatGPT\u2019s launch in November 2022. According to the EU\u2019s official <a href=\"https:\/\/commission.europa.eu\/news\/ai-act-enters-force-2024-08-01_en#:~:text=On%201%20August%202024%2C%20the,and%20deployment%20in%20the%20EU.\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">announcement<\/a>, the European Commission has already \u201claunched a consultation on a Code of Practice for providers of general-purpose Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) models.\u201d It \u201cwill address critical areas such as transparency, copyright-related rules, and risk management.\u201d The Commission \u201cexpects to finalise the Code of Practice by April 2025.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>California SB 1047 has its turn in the sun<\/strong>. In perhaps the most surprising development of the summer, the EU AI Act was eclipsed, at least here in the U.S., by all the talk around California <a href=\"https:\/\/leginfo.legislature.ca.gov\/faces\/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB1047\">SB 1047<\/a>, the \u201cSafe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act,\u201d the brainchild of California State Senator Scott Wiener. In broad strokes, the bill would impose \u201csafety and security\u201d obligations (and liability) on \u201ccovered model\u201d developers to protect against \u201ccritical harms.\u201d These harms are defined as (a) AI-driven \u201cchemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon\u201d creation or use that results in \u201cmass casualties\u201d; (b) one or more AI-powered \u201ccyberattacks on critical infrastructure\u201d that either causes \u201cmass casualties\u201d or at least $500 million in damages; or (c) AI acting \u201cwith limited human oversight, intervention, or supervision\u201d to create the same level of human casualty or financial harm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The bill set off intense debate, nicely recapped in these articles from <a href=\"https:\/\/techcrunch.com\/2024\/08\/30\/california-ai-bill-sb-1047-aims-to-prevent-ai-disasters-but-silicon-valley-warns-it-will-cause-one\/\"><em>TechCrunch<\/em><\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/venturebeat.com\/ai\/ai-safety-showdown-yann-lecun-slams-californias-sb-1047-as-geoffrey-hinton-backs-new-regulations\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>VentureBeat<\/em><\/a>, and <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/9\/11\/24226251\/california-sb-1047-ai-industry-regulation-backlash\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">The Verge<\/a><\/em>.\u00a0 The California legislature did ultimately pass the bill on August 29, and it now awaits Governor Gavin Newsom\u2019s signature, along with around 37 other AI-related bills (more on these in the next AI Update). According to the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.latimes.com\/entertainment-arts\/business\/story\/2024-09-17\/newsom-ai-bills-sag-aftra\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>Los Angeles Times<\/em><\/a>, Governor Newsom has not yet decided whether he will sign SB 1047: \u201cIt\u2019s one of those bills that come across your desk infrequently, where it depends on who the last person on the call [was] in terms of how persuasive they are.\u201d Hopefully, AI bots are not on the other end of that phone line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Content and data deals for AI models keep coming. <\/strong>Since December 2023, it seems like every few months another major publisher or news media company announces a deal allowing AI model providers like OpenAI and Google access to their content for AI model training and output synthesis purposes. To date, OpenAI has signed deals with Axel Springer (December 2023), the <em>Financial Times<\/em> (April 2024), News Corp. (May 2024) and the Atlantic and Vox Media (also May 2024). Reddit announced a deal with Google back in February. The latest entrant is Conde Nast, publisher of <em>Vanity Fair<\/em>, <em>The New Yorker<\/em>, <em>Vogue<\/em>, and <em>WIRED<\/em>. According to an August 20 <a href=\"https:\/\/thehill.com\/homenews\/media\/4837280-conde-nast-partners-with-openai\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">report<\/a> from <em>The Hill<\/em>, Cond\u00e9 Nast announced a \u201cmultiyear partnership\u201d with OpenAI that will \u201cmake up\u201d for lost revenue. Specific financial terms, not surprisingly, are confidential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>And so do the copyright suits<\/strong>. On August 19, another putative class of book authors filed another copyright suit against an AI model developer, in the Northern District of California. The case is <em>Bartz et al. v. Anthropic<\/em>, assigned to tech-savvy Judge William Alsup. Reinforcing a trend that\u2019s emerged since the start of 2024, the <a href=\"https:\/\/fingfx.thomsonreuters.com\/gfx\/legaldocs\/gdvzmggwjpw\/ANTHROPIC%20AUTHOR%20COPYRIGHT%20LAWSUIT%20complaint.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">complaint<\/a> includes only a single count for direct copyright infringement, leaving out other causes of action (DMCA, unjust enrichment, conversion) that courts in other generative AI cases have pruned on motions to dismiss. The core liability theories in <em>Bartz<\/em> are familiar too from other cases: Anthropic is alleged to have engaged in unauthorized intermediate copying of the authors\u2019 works during training of its Claude LLM model when Anthropic used datasets like \u201cBooks3\u201d and \u201cThe Pile\u201d that included, in their large corpus, copies of the plaintiffs\u2019 works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ten days later, on August 29, four professional voice actors entered the courtroom fray, suing ElevenLabs, a company offering text-to-speech AI synthesis tools, in the District of Delaware. That <a href=\"https:\/\/storage.courtlistener.com\/recap\/gov.uscourts.ded.86708\/gov.uscourts.ded.86708.1.0.pdf\">complaint<\/a> alleges that ElevenLabs created unauthorized \u201cvoice clones\u201d of the actors and asserts claims under the DMCA as well as Texas\u2019s and New York\u2019s right of publicity, right of privacy, and misappropriation of name and likeness laws.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">With <em>Bartz <\/em>and <em>Vacker<\/em>, we are up to about 30 copyright and copyright-related cases targeting AI developers (depending on how you count consolidated suits). For a weekly detailed summary of developments in these cases, take a look at the website run by Professor Edward Lee of Santa Clara University School of Law, <a href=\"https:\/\/chatgptiseatingtheworld.com\/\"><em>ChatGPTiseatingtheworld.com<\/em><\/a>. The name may be breezy, but the content is on point and comprehensive. It appears that none of these copyright cases will see trial until 2025 at the earliest.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>What <em>should<\/em> we be following?<\/strong> Have suggestions for legal topics to cover in future editions? Please send them to <a href=\"mailto:AI-Update@duanemorris.com\">AI-Update@duanemorris.com<\/a>. We\u2019d love to hear from you and continue the conversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Editor-in-Chief<\/em><\/strong><strong>: <\/strong><a href=\"mailto:agoranin@duanemorris.com\">Alex Goranin<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Deputy Editors<\/em><\/strong><strong>:<\/strong> <a href=\"mailto:mcmousley@duanemorris.com\">Matt Mousley<\/a> and <a href=\"mailto:tmarandola@duanemorris.com\">Tyler Marandola<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>If you were forwarded this newsletter, <\/em><a href=\"mailto:AI-Update@duanemorris.com?subject=Subscribe%20to%20the%20mailing%20list%20&amp;body=Please%20add%20me%20to%20The%20AI%20Update%20list.\"><em>subscribe to the mailing list<\/em><\/a><em> to receive future issues.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>#HelloWorld. It\u2019s been a long summer hiatus. Please bear with us as we play our way back into shape. In this issue, we recap the summer highlights of AI legal and regulatory developments. Of course, the EU AI Act, but not just the EU AI Act. California continues to enact headline-grabbing AI legislation, content owners &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/2024\/09\/18\/the-ai-update-september-18-2024\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;The AI Update | September 18, 2024&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[27,35,160,16,13,17],"ppma_author":[5],"class_list":["post-264","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general","tag-ai","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-eu-ai-act","tag-matt-mousley","tag-theaiupdate","tag-tylermarandola"],"authors":[{"term_id":5,"user_id":6,"is_guest":0,"slug":"duanemorris3","display_name":"Duane Morris","avatar_url":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/63\/2020\/10\/dmlogo.jpg","author_category":"1","last_name":"Davies","first_name":"Thomas","job_title":"","user_url":"https:\/\/www.duanemorris.com","description":"<a href=\"http:\/\/www.duanemorris.com\">Visit the Duane Morris website.<\/a>"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/264","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=264"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/264\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=264"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=264"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=264"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/artificialintelligence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=264"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}