Nos derniers articles

“... the paper analyses (i) how the AI Act should be applied and implemented according to its original intention of a risk-based approach, (ii) how the AI Act should be complemented by sector-specific legislation in the future to avoid inconsistencies and over-regulation, and (iii) what lessons legislators around the world can learn from the AI Act in regulating AI.”

“This paper discusses and analyses the regulatory approach underlying the AI Act, the main issues surrounding the proposed regulation, and the implications for the AI Act's ability to achieve its goals.”

“This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the recent EU AI Act, the regulatory framework surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI), focusing on foundation models, open-source exemptions, remote biometric identification (RBI), copyright, high-risk classification, innovation, and the implications for fundamental rights and employment.”

The AI Act, initially overlooking multifunctional AI like foundation models, led to debates. Industry sought exemption, civil groups pushed for inclusion, foreseeing safety gaps and burdens on users. "General Purpose AI systems" (GPAIS) emerged in discussions, aiming to extend Act requirements to adaptable models, addressing operator responsibility. Current debate focuses on adapting the Act to cover these advanced AI, revealing its initial limitations. The paper will delve into this evolution, highlighting challenges and proposing policy adjustments for GPAIS regulation within the AI Act's framework.

Determining liability for AI-caused harm lacks clear answers. In cases involving Tesla autopilot accidents, unfair discrimination by AI in HR, or medical procedures, responsibility is blurry. The EU's proposed AI liability regime and AI Act aim to address these complexities, bridging gaps in risk regulation and liability for AI-human interactions.