WLG colleagues in the Technology Group held a round-robin discussion on the State of Regulations on AI on February 11 with 19 participants from various jurisdictions. Read our key takeaways below.
Key Takeaways
- GermanandAustrianmembers view the EU AI Act as overly prescriptive, raising concerns about compliance burdens, uncertainty, and potential impacts on innovation and product development in Europe.
- Indiais taking a more principles-based, risk-focused approach to AI regulation, aiming to govern bad actors rather than delve deeply into technical parameters.
- Taiwanhas proposed an AI Basic Law that sets general guidelines rather than detailed restrictions, reflecting an intent to allow space for AI development.
- TheUSAlacks federal-level AI regulations, but some states like Colorado have introduced comprehensive AI statutes, creating a patchwork that practitioners must closely monitor.
- Singaporehas adopted a light-touch, sector-specific regulatory approach, complemented by initiatives like the AI Verify framework to enable verification of AI system functionality. This provides an alternative model to the EU's comprehensive regulation.
- Ukraine'sAI industry has seen growth, with many teams pivoting to military applications. This creates a relatively unregulated environment that is attracting foreign investment.
- Members from across jurisdictions, includingMexicoandUruguay, highlighted the challenges of balancing data privacy regulations with the development and deployment of AI technologies, underscoring the need for harmonized approaches.
Originally published Feb 20, 2025
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
