Artificial Intelligence

Originally posted on Squire Patton Boggs’ Capital Thinking blog by David StewartLudmilla Kasulke and Dominic Braithwaite.


On March 11, 2024, US President Joe Biden released his Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 budget request, which included proposals on U.S. Artificial Intelligence (AI) development and efforts to implement the Biden Administration’s Executive Order (EO) on AI. The budget identifies the National Science Foundation (NSF) as central to U.S. leadership in AI, requesting $10.2 billion in funding for the agency. $2 billion of that total would be dedicated to research and development (R&D) in accordance with CHIPS Act priorities, including AI, and $30 million would support the National AI Research Resource pilot program. The budget also requests $65 million for the Commerce Department “to safeguard, regulate, and promote AI, including protecting the American public against its societal risks.” This funding would include directing the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish the U.S. AI Safety Institute. The institute would be responsible for operationalizing “NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework by creating guidelines, tools, benchmarks, and best practices for evaluating and mitigating dangerous capabilities and conducting evaluations including red-teaming to identify and mitigate AI risk.” Further, the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, which is responsible for implementing aspects of both the CHIPS Act and the AI EO, would receive $8.6 billion under the President’s proposed budget.Continue Reading Biden Budget Proposal Advances AI Priorities

On January 23, 2024, the Japan Agency for Cultural Affairs (ACA) released its draft “Approach to AI and Copyright” for public comment, to clarify how ingestion and output of copyrighted materials in Japan should be considered. On February 29, 2024, after considering nearly 25,000 comments, additional changes were made. This document, created by an ACA

In case you missed it, below are recent posts from Privacy World covering the latest developments on data privacy, security and innovation. Please reach out to the authors if you are interested in additional information.

In Narrow Vote California Moves Next Generation Privacy Regs Forward | Privacy World

EDPB Versus Ireland? Does the Opinion on

The staff and board of the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) have been working for nearly two years on a new set of proposed rulemaking under the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act  (“CCPA”).  A year ago the current CCPA regulations were finalized, but several complex issues where reserved for further consideration and some proposals were pulled back to ease initial implementation.  Their enforcement was initially enjoined and delayed by a trial court, but a California appeals court reversed that order, including any delay on the effectiveness of future regulations.  New draft regulations were proposed by the CPPA staff and considered but not approved by the CPPA board in Q4 of 2023.  In February 2024 further revised draft regulations were released and considered on March 8 by the CCPA board, which voted 5 to 0 to move forward amendments to the existing regulations and, after a spirited debate, 3 (Urban, Le and Worthe for) to 2 (de la Torre and Mactaggert against) to also move forward with new draft regulations on data risk assessments and data driven technologies, with a direction to staff to add to the requirements for filing abridged assessments with the CPPA a discussion on what safeguards were employed to mitigate risks (with an exception for when disclosure would be a security risk).  In each case the staff was authorized to prepare the materials necessary under administrative procedures laws and regulations to publish a notice of prepared rulemaking, the publication which will be subject to a further Board vote after reviewing the rule making package.  The staff was also authorized to make further edits to the draft regulations to clarify text or conform with law.  Although the motions did not set a firm date for staff to complete that work, the discussions contemplate that it would be done by the July 2024 Board meeting at the latest.  That could result in effective regulations in Q3, though given the complexity and lack of Board consensus year-end is optimistic.Continue Reading In Narrow Vote California Moves Next Generation Privacy Regs Forward

On March 8, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA” or “Agency”) Board (“Board”) will consider draft regulations that set forth how automated decisionmaking technology (“ADMT”) and profiling will be regulated under the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”).  The proposal includes the regulation of a new concept of “behavioral advertising” that is deemed “extensive profiling”

In case you missed it, below are recent posts from Privacy World covering the latest developments on data privacy, security and innovation. Please reach out to the authors if you are interested in additional information.Continue Reading Privacy World Week in Review

Background

On March 1, 2024, Singapore’s personal data protection commission (Commission) issued its advisory guidelines (Guidelines) on the use of personal data for AI systems that provide recommendations, predictions and decisions.

The Guidelines follow a public consultation in July and August last year, in which a number of organizations submitted comments[1] on the proposed

In case you missed it, below are recent posts from Privacy World covering the latest developments on data privacy, security and innovation. Please reach out to the authors if you are interested in additional information.

Deep Fake of CFO on Videocall Used to Defraud Company of US$25M | Privacy World

Address Cyber-risks From Quantum Computing

Acting expeditiously in part in response to recent events, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) declared on February 8 that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s “restrictions on the use of ‘artificial or prerecorded voice’ encompass current [artificial intelligence (“AI”)] technologies that generate human voices.” Therefore, the FCC ruled “calls that use such technologies fall under the TCPA and the [FCC’s]…implementing rules and…require the prior express consent of the called party to initiate such callas absent an emergency purpose or exemption.” If telemarketing is involved, prior express written consent is required. However, contrary to other media reports, the FCC ruling neither bans use of AI, nor even requires consent to use AI to create content that is in text or that is subsequently converted into artificial voice. Rather, it merely equates AI-voice generation to other forms of artificial or prerecorded voice messages for TCPA consent purposes. Since prior express consent to use of artificial or prerecorded voice messages is what the TCPA requires, that is what the consent should cover. However, it is advised that the use of AI to generate such audio content should also be disclosed as part of the consent.Continue Reading FCC Rules Voice-Cloned Robocalls Are Covered by the TCPA as Artificial/Pre-Recorded