FCC Chairman Pai announced today that the FCC would seek public comment on the Administration’s July 27 Petition for Rulemaking on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA)—the law that to date has meant that social media companies, ISPs, and other “online intermediaries” have not been subject to liability for their users’ actions. Comments will be due on Wednesday, September 2 and reply comments will be due on Thursday, September 17.

While there is much that is novel about the Petition itself, the FCC’s decision to seek comment on it appears to follow standard operating procedures. At this point, there is no indication of whether the FCC will take more formal steps attempting to adopt any of the rules proposed by the Administration.
Continue Reading FCC Seeks Comment on Section 230 Petition

Earlier this month, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) asked for comment on a Petition for Rulemaking filed by the Consumer Technology Association (“CTA”) that proposes to modify the FCC’s device authorization rules to allow the importation and conditional, preauthorization marketing and sales of radiofrequency (“RF”) devices that have not yet been approved under the FCC’s rules.  The deadline for filing comments supporting or opposing the petition is July 9, 2020.
Continue Reading IoT Update: FCC Considering Changes to Device Rules

Lee Tiedrich, B.J. Altvater, and James Yoon recently published an article summarizing recent developments in artificial intelligence law and policy on the University of Pennsylvania Law School’s Regulatory Review.  The article primarily focuses on developments in the United States, including the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act introduced by members of the House Committee

In this final instalment of our series of blogs on the European Commission’s plans for AI and data, announced on 19 February 2020, we discuss some potential effects on companies in the digital health sector. As discussed in our previous blog posts (here, here and here), the papers published by the European Commission cover broad concepts and apply generally — but, in places, they specifically mention healthcare and medical devices.

The Commission recognizes the important role that AI and big data analysis can play in improving healthcare, but also notes the specific risks that could arise given the effects that such new technologies may have on individuals’ health, safety, and fundamental rights. The Commission also notes that existing EU legislation already affords a high level of protection for individuals, including through medical devices laws and data protection laws. The Commission’s proposals therefore focus on addressing the gap between these existing rules and the residual risks that remain in respect of new technologies. Note that the Commission’s proposals in the White Paper on AI are open for public consultation until 19 May 2020.

Continue Reading AI Update: European Commission’s Plans for AI and Data: Focus on Digital Health (Part 4 of 4)

On 19 February 2020, the European Commission presented its long-awaited strategies for data and AI.  These follow Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s commitment upon taking office to put forward legislative proposals for a “coordinated European approach to the human and ethical implications of AI” within the new Commission’s first 100 days.  Although the papers published this week do not set out a comprehensive EU legal framework for AI, they do give a clear indication of the Commission’s key priorities and anticipated next steps.

The Commission strategies are set out in four separate papers—two on AI, and one each on Europe’s digital future and the data economy.  Read together, it is clear that the Commission seeks to position the EU as a digital leader, both in terms of trustworthy AI and the wider data economy.

Continue Reading AI Update: European Commission Presents Strategies for Data and AI (Part 1 of 4)

On February 4, 2020, the United Kingdom’s Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (“DEI”) published its final report on “online targeting” (the “Report”), examining practices used to monitor a person’s online behaviour and subsequently customize their experience. In October 2018, the UK government appointed the DEI, an expert committee that advises the UK government on how to maximize the benefits of new technologies, to explore how data is used in shaping peoples’ online experiences. The Report sets out its findings and recommendations.
Continue Reading Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation publishes final report on “online targeting”

U.S. federal policymakers continued to focus on artificial intelligence (“AI”) and the Internet of Things (“IoT”) in the fourth quarter of 2019, including by introducing substantive bills that would regulate the use of such technology and by supporting bills aimed at further study of how such technology may impact different sectors. In our fourth AI & IoT Quarterly Legislative Update, we detail the notable legislative events from this quarter on AI, IoT, cybersecurity as it relates to AI and IoT, and connected and autonomous vehicles (“CAVs”).
Continue Reading U.S. AI and IoT Quarterly Legislative Update: Fourth Quarter 2019

The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) has issued and is consulting on draft guidance about explaining decisions made by AI.  The ICO prepared the guidance with The Alan Turing Institute, which is the UK’s national institute for data science and artificial intelligence.  Among other things, the guidance sets out key principles to follow and steps to take when explaining AI-assisted decisions — including in relation to different types of AI algorithms — and the policies and procedures that organizations should consider putting in place.

The draft guidance builds upon the ICO’s previous work in this area, including its AI Auditing Framework, June 2019 Project ExplAIN interim report, and September 2017 paper ‘Big data, artificial intelligence, machine learning and data protection’.  (Previous blog posts that track this issue are available here.)  Elements of the new draft guidance touch on points that go beyond narrow GDPR requirements, such as AI ethics (see, in particular, the recommendation to provide explanations of the fairness or societal impacts of AI systems).  Other sections of the guidance are quite technical; for example, the ICO provides its own analysis of the possible uses and interpretability of eleven specific types of AI algorithms.

Organizations that develop, test or deploy AI decision-making systems should review the draft guidance and consider responding to the consultation. The consultation is open until January 24, 2020.  A final version is expected to be published later next year.

Continue Reading UK ICO and The Alan Turing Insitute Issue Draft Guidance on Explaining Decisions Made by AI

On October 31, 2019, Elizabeth Denham, the UK’s Information Commissioner issued an Opinion and an accompanying blog urging police forces to slow down adoption of live facial recognition technology and take steps to justify its use.  The Commissioner calls on the UK government to introduce a statutory binding code of practice on the use of biometric technology such as live facial recognition technology.  The Commissioner also announced that the ICO is separately investigating the use of facial recognition by private sector organizations, and will be reporting on those findings in due course.

The Opinion follows the ICO’s investigation into the use of live facial recognition technology in trials conducted by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and South Wales Police (SWP).  The ICO’s investigation was triggered by the recent UK High Court decision in R (Bridges) v The Chief Constable of South Wales (see our previous blog post here), where the court held that the use of facial recognition technology by the South Wales Police Force (“SWP”) was lawful.

The ICO had intervened in the case.  In the Opinion, the Commissioner notes that, in some areas, the High Court did not agree with the Commissioner’s submissions.  The Opinion states that the Commissioner respects and acknowledges the decision of the High Court, but does not consider that the decision should be seen as a blanket authorization to use live facial recognition in all circumstances.

Continue Reading AI/IoT Update: UK’s Information Commissioner issues opinion on use of live facial recognition technology by police forces

On 19 September 2019, the European Parliamentary Research Service (“EPRS”)—the European Parliament’s in-house research service—released a briefing paper that summarizes the current status of the EU’s approach to developing a regulatory framework for ethical AI.  Although not a policymaking body, the EPRS can provide useful insights into the direction of EU policy on an issue.  The paper summarises recent calls in the EU for adopting legally binding instruments to regulate AI, in particular to set common rules on AI transparency, set common requirements for fundamental rights impact assessments, and provide an adequate legal framework for facial recognition technology.

The briefing paper follows publication of the European Commission’s high-level expert group’s Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (the “Guidelines”), and the announcement by incoming Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that she will put forward legislative proposals for a “coordinated European approach to the human and ethical implications of AI” within her first 100 days in office.

Continue Reading European Parliamentary Research Service issues a briefing paper on implementing EU’s ethical guidelines on AI