Photo of Marty Hansen

Marty Hansen

Martin Hansen has over two decades of experience representing some of the world’s leading innovative companies in the internet, IT, e-commerce, and life sciences sectors on a broad range of regulatory, intellectual property, and competition issues, including related to artificial intelligence. Martin has extensive experience in advising clients on matters arising under EU and U.S. law, UK law, the World Trade Organization agreements, and other trade agreements.

Contact:Read more about Marty HansenEmail

On 29 March 2023, the UK Government published a White Paper entitled “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation” (“White Paper”). The White Paper elaborates on the approach to AI set out by the Government in its 2022 AI Governance and Regulation Policy Statement (“Policy Statement” – covered in our blog post here). This announcement comes following the Government’s commitments, in the Spring Budget 2023, to build an expert taskforce to develop the UK’s capabilities in AI foundation models and produce guidance on the relationship between intellectual property law and generative AI (for more details of these initiatives, see here).

In its White Paper, the UK Government confirms that, unlike the EU, it does not plan to adopt new legislation to regulate AI, nor will it create a new regulator for AI (for further details on the EU’s proposed AI regulation see our blog posts here and here). Instead, the UK would require existing regulators, including the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), to take responsibility for the establishment, promotion, and oversight of responsible AI in their respective sectors. Regulators’ activities would be reinforced by the establishment of new support and oversight functions within central Government. This approach is already beginning to play out in certain regulated areas in the UK. For example, in October 2022, the Bank of England and Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) jointly released a Discussion Paper on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning considering how AI in financial services should be regulated and, in March 2023, the ICO updated its Guidance on AI and Data Protection.  

Continue Reading UK Government Adopts a “Pro-Innovation” Approach to AI Regulation

The EU’s AI Act Proposal is continuing to make its way through the ordinary legislative procedure.  In December 2022, the Council published its sixth and final compromise text (see our previous blog post), and over the last few months, the European Parliament has been negotiating its own amendments to the AI Act Proposal.  The European Parliament is expected to finalize its position in the upcoming weeks, before entering into trilogue negotiations with the Commission and the Council, which could begin as early as April 2023.  The AI Act is expected to be adopted before the end of 2023, during the Spanish presidency of the Council, and ahead of the European elections in 2024. 

During negotiations between the Council and the European Parliament, we can expect further changes to the Commission’s AI Act proposal, in an attempt to iron out any differences and agree on a final version of the Act.  Below, we outline the key amendments proposed by the European Parliament in the course of its negotiations with the Council.

Continue Reading A Preview into the European Parliament’s Position on the EU’s AI Act Proposal

2023 is set to be an important year for developments in AI regulation and policy in the EU. At the end of last year, on December 6, 2022, the Council of the EU (the “Council”) adopted its general approach and compromise text on the proposed Regulation Laying Down Harmonized Rules on Artificial Intelligence (the “AI Act”), bringing the AI Act one step closer to being adopted. The European Parliament is currently developing its own position on the AI Act which is expected to be finalized by March 2023. Following this, the Council, Parliament and European Commission (“Commission”) will enter into trilogue discussions to finalize the Act. Once adopted, it will be directly applicable across all EU Member States and its obligations are likely to apply three years after the AI Act’s entry into force (according to the Council’s compromise text).  

In 2022, the Commission also put forward new liability rules for AI systems via the proposed AI Liability Directive (“AILD”) and updates to the Product Liability Directive (“PLD”). The AILD establishes rules for non-contractual, fault-based civil claims involving AI systems. Specifically, the proposal establishes rules that would govern the preservation and disclosure of evidence in cases involving high-risk AI, as well as rules on the burden of proof and corresponding rebuttable presumptions. Meanwhile, the revised PLD harmonizes rules that apply to no-fault liability claims brought by persons who suffer physical injury or damage to property caused by defective products. Software, including AI systems, are explicitly named as “products” under the proposal meaning that an injured person can claim compensation for damage caused by AI (see our previous blog post for further details on the proposed AILD and PLD). Both pieces of legislation will be reviewed, and potentially amended, by the Council and the European Parliament in 2023.

Continue Reading EU AI Policy and Regulation: What to look out for in 2023

On May 10, 2022, Prince Charles announced in the Queen’s Speech that the UK Government’s proposed Online Safety Bill (the “OSB”) will proceed through Parliament. The OSB is currently at committee stage in the House of Commons. Since it was first announced in December 2020, the OSB has been the subject of intense debate and scrutiny on the balance it seeks to strike between online safety and protecting children on the one hand, and freedom of expression and privacy on the other.

Continue Reading Online Safety Bill to Proceed Through Parliament

On 6 October 2021, the European Parliament (“EP”) voted in favor of a resolution banning the use of facial recognition technology (“FRT”) by law enforcement in public spaces. The resolution forms part of a non-legislative report on the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters (“AI Report”) published by the EP’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (“LIBE”) in July 2021. The AI Report will now be sent to the European Commission, which has three months to either (i) submit, or indicate it will submit, a legislative proposal on the use of AI by the police and judicial authorities as set out in the AI Report; or (ii) if it chooses not to submit a proposal, explain why.
Continue Reading European Parliament Votes in Favor of Banning the Use of Facial Recognition in Law Enforcement

On 22 September 2021, the UK Government published its 10-year strategy on artificial intelligence (“AI”; the “UK AI Strategy”).

The UK AI Strategy has three main pillars: (1) investing and planning for the long-term requirements of the UK’s AI ecosystem; (2) supporting the transition to an AI-enabled economy across all sectors and regions of the UK; and (3) ensuring that the UK gets the national and international governance of AI technologies “right”.

The approach to AI regulation as set out in the UK AI Strategy is largely pro-innovation, in line with the UK Government’s Plan for Digital Regulation published in July 2021.Continue Reading The UK Government Publishes its AI Strategy

In April 2021, the European Commission released its proposed Regulation Laying Down Harmonized Rules on Artificial Intelligence (the “Regulation”), which would establish rules on the development, placing on the market, and use of artificial intelligence systems (“AI systems”) across the EU. The proposal, comprising 85 articles and nine annexes, is part of a wider package of Commission initiatives aimed at positioning the EU as a world leader in trustworthy and ethical AI and technological innovation.

The Commission’s objectives with the Regulation are twofold: to promote the development of AI technologies and harness their potential benefits, while also protecting individuals against potential threats to their health, safety, and fundamental rights posed by AI systems. To that end, the Commission proposal focuses primarily on AI systems identified as “high-risk,” but also prohibits three AI practices and imposes transparency obligations on providers of certain non-high-risk AI systems as well. Notably, it would impose significant administrative costs on high-risk AI systems of around 10 percent of the underlying value, based on compliance, oversight, and verification costs. This blog highlights several key aspects of the proposal.Continue Reading European Commission Proposes New Artificial Intelligence Regulation

On February 11, 2021, the European Commission launched a public consultation on its initiative to fight child sexual abuse online (the “Initiative”), which aims to impose obligations on online service providers to detect child sexual abuse online and to report it to public authorities. The consultation is part of the data collection activities announced in the Initiative’s inception impact assessment issued in December last year. The consultation runs until April 15, 2021, and the Commission intends to propose the necessary legislation by the end of the second quarter of 2021.
Continue Reading European Commission Launches Consultation on Initiative to Fight Child Sexual Abuse

On 17 December 2020, the Council of Europe’s* Ad hoc Committee on Artificial Intelligence (CAHAI) published a Feasibility Study (the “Study”) on Artificial Intelligence (AI) legal standards. The Study examines the feasibility and potential elements of a legal framework for the development and deployment of AI, based on the Council of Europe’s human rights standards. Its main conclusion is that current regulations do not suffice in creating the necessary legal certainty, trust, and level playing field needed to guide the development of AI. Accordingly, it proposes the development of a new legal framework for AI consisting of both binding and non-binding Council of Europe instruments.

The Study recognizes the major opportunities of AI systems to promote societal development and human rights. Alongside these opportunities, it also identifies the risks that AI could endanger rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as well as democracy and the rule of law. Examples of the risks to human rights cited in the Study include AI systems that undermine the right to equality and non-discrimination by perpetuating biases and stereotypes (e.g., in employment), and AI-driven surveillance and tracking applications that jeopardise individuals’ right to freedom of assembly and expression.Continue Reading The Council of Europe Publishes Feasibility Study on Developing a Legal Instrument for Ethical AI

In April 2019, the UK Government published its Online Harms White Paper and launched a Consultation. In February 2020, the Government published its initial response to that Consultation. In its 15 December 2020 full response to the Online Harms White Paper Consultation, the Government outlined its vision for tackling harmful content online through a new regulatory framework, to be set out in a new Online Safety Bill (“OSB”).

This development comes at a time of heightened scrutiny of, and regulatory changes to, digital services and markets. Earlier this month, the UK Competition and Markets Authority published recommendations to the UK Government on the design and implementation of a new regulatory regime for digital markets (see our update here).

The UK Government is keen to ensure that policy initiatives in this sector are coordinated with similar legislation, including those in the US and the EU. The European Commission also published its proposal for a Digital Services Act on 15 December, proposing a somewhat similar system for regulating illegal online content that puts greater responsibilities on technology companies.

Key points of the UK Government’s plans for the OSB are set out below.Continue Reading UK Government Plans for an Online Safety Bill