Access the full list of the EDPB and WP29 Guidelines here, including consultation versions, now-current versions and redlines between versions.
This program provides timely updates, best practices, and emerging developments in today’s data protection, privacy, and security industry.
This series of webinars will address the potential impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) regulations on business across the globe. Recent developments in general availability of AI and generative AI solutions are leading regulators, at a global level, to consider legal frameworks to protect both individuals affected by AI and digital sovereignty. Our panelists will address these potential regulatory developments, as well as the expected timeline for these changes, region by region.
Our first panel will feature a discussion focused on current and future regulatory requirements on the AI industry throughout the EU and the UK. With the language of the EU’s Al Act heading into its trialogue, it is even more important for stakeholders to understand the EU’s approach and prepare for the potential impact of this regulation in Europe, UK, and beyond. The panelists will address key questions, such as:
- What new undertaking will be bearing on the stakeholders in this industry?
- Will government regulation be “technology neutral”?
- Could the various frameworks lead to conflicts for local compliance efforts?
- Will a requirement for an AI system to explain its thinking or provide substantive sources for all results have a deleterious impact on its ability to “think” independently?
- Is it too late for stakeholders to have a say in these expected frameworks?
Claude-Étienne Armingaud | PARTNER | PARIS
Giovanni Campi | POLICY DIRECTOR | BRUSSELS
Jennifer Marsh | PARTNER | LONDON
Register here: K&L Gates Website
August may be perceived as the month where France shuts down for the summer. Yet, just before the summer ’23 holiday, the French Data Protection Authority (“CNIL”) published several call to action for the various players of the data ecosystems in general and in artificial intelligence (AI) in particular, following its 16 May 2023 announcement of an AI action plan:
- Opening and re-use of publicly accessible data – The CNIL published a draft guidance on the such data usage, and all stakeholders are invited to weight in until 15 October 2023 before its finalization. While non-binding, this guidance is expected to lead the way on how the EU’s Supervisory Authority will apprehend and enforce the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) when personal data is scraped from online sources and subsequently used for subsequent purposes. This notably focuses on Art. 14 GDPR and the indirect collection of personal data and specific prior information requirements. Artificial Intelligence is explicitly mentioned by the CNIL in the draft, as such data, which feeds large-language models, “undeniably contributes to the development of the digital economy and is at the core of artificial intelligence.” Stakeholders are invited to submit their observations online through the dedicated portal.
- Artificial Intelligence Sandbox – Following in the footsteps of its connected cameras, EdTech & eHealth initiatives, the CNIL is launching an AI sandbox call for projects, where stakeholders involved in AI in connection with public services may apply to receive dedicated assistance by the regulator to co-construct AI systems complying with data protection and privacy rules.
- Creation of databases for Artificial Intelligence uses – Open to the broadest possible array of stakeholders (including individuals), this call for contributions notably addresses the specific issue relating to the use of publicly accessible data and aims at informing the CNIL of the various positions at play and how to balance GDPR’s requirements (information, legitimate interests, exercise of rights) with data subjects’ expectations. Stakeholders are invited to submit their observations online through the dedicated form (in French – our free translation in English is available below)- no deadline for submission has been set.
Thrilled to share that I’ve been shortlisted for Privacy Leader: Legal for this year’s PICCASO (Privacy, InfoSec, Culture Change & Awareness Societal Organisation) Awards.
Grateful to the award committee for the recognition and to our K&L Gates #DataProtection team as a whole who is a constant source of motivation, motivation and fun even in complex moments (especially in Europe cc Ulrike Elteste (Mahlmann) Noirin McFadden Andreas Müller Veronica Muratori Thomas Nietsch Camille Scarparo). Also psyched to be among such a roster nominees, whether in this category or the others as a whole. Whoever gets awarded, it’ll always be a win for #privacy!
Looking forward to celebrate with you all in person in London!
In this webinar, our lawyers discuss generative artificial intelligence (AI). Fast paced growth in generative AI is changing the way we work and live. With such changes come complex issues and uncertainty. We will address the legal, policy and ethical risks, mitigation, and best practices to consider as you develop generative AI products and services, or use generative AI in the operation of your business.
With Annette Becker, Guillermo Christensen, Whitney McCollum, Jilie Rizzo, and Mark Wittow
If you were not able to join last Tuesday, you can watch the replay below:
Source: K&L Gates Hub
European Parliament Adopts Negotiating Mandate on European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act; Trilogues BeginJune 26th, 2023 | Posted by in Artificial Intelligence | Ethics | Europe | IT | Legislation | Non classé - (0 Comments)
On 14 June 2023, the European Parliament (Parliament) plenary voted on its position on the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), which was adopted by a large majority, with 499 votes in favor, 28 against, and 93 abstentions. The newly adopted text (Parliament position) will serve as the Parliament’s negotiating position during the forthcoming interinstitutional negotiations (trilogues) with the Council of the European Union (Council) and the European Commission (Commission).
The members of Parliament (MEPs) proposed several changes to the Commission’s proposal, published on 21 April 2021, including expanding the list of high-risk uses and prohibited AI practices. Specific transparency and safety provisions were also added on foundation models and generative AI systems. MEPs also introduced a definition of AI that is aligned with the definition provided by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. In addition, the text reinforces natural persons’ (or their groups’) right to file a complaint about AI systems and receive explanations of decisions based on high-risk AI systems that significantly impact their fundamental rights.
The Parliament position provides that AI, or an AI System, should refer to “a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, generate outputs such as predictions, recommendations, or decisions, that influence physical or virtual environments.” This amends the Commission’s proposal, where an AI System was solely limited to software acting for human-defined objectives and now encompasses the metaverses through the explicit inclusion of “virtual environments.”
Agreement on the final version of the definition of AI is expected to be found at the technical level during trilogue negotiations, as it does appear to be a noncontentious item.
Another notable inclusion relates to foundation models (Foundation Models) that were not yet in the public eye when the Commission’s proposal was published and were defined as a subset of AI System “trained on broad data at scale, is designed for generality of output, and can be adapted to a wide range of distinctive tasks.”(more…)
- Zelda Olentia, Senior Product Manager, RadarFirst
- Claude-Étienne Armingaud, CIPP/E, Partner, Data Protection Privacy and Security Practice Group Coordinator, K&L Gates LLP
Air Date: Wednesday 14 June at 1 pm ET / 10 am PT. Replay on demand available here!
Gartner predicts that by the end of 2024, 75% of the world’s population will have its personal data covered under modern privacy regulations. This exponential increase from only 10% global coverage in 2020 raises the stakes for global organizations. The challenge will be to ensure compliance, while safeguarding trust for an unprecedented volume of regulated data.
Join the upcoming live Q&A to learn what’s driving this expansion and how to prepare. You’ll hear from Zelda Olentia, Senior Product Manager at RadarFirst, and special guest, Claude-Etienne Armingaud who is a partner at K&L Gates LLP and a coordinator for the Firm’s Data Protection, Privacy, and Security practice group.
In this session we will cover:
→ What is driving the expansion of privacy regulation?
→ Where are we on this path towards 65% global coverage?
→ How do you scale privacy operations for international privacy laws quickly and effectively before year-end 2024?
Closing in on the fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) announced on 22 May 2023 that it had fined Meta for EUR 1,2b (USD 1.3b), the highest GDPR fine levied since 2018.
Further to the DPC decision (Decision), and in addition to the record fine, Meta will need to:
- suspend any future transfers of personal data to the United States within five months from the date of notification of the decision to Meta Ireland;
- ensure the compliance of its data processing operations by ceasing the unlawful processing, including storage, in the United States of personal data of its users in the European Economic Area, transferred without sufficient safeguards, within six months from the date of notification of the DPC’s decision to Meta Ireland.
The core of the grievances relates to a decade-long (and going) crusade initiated by datactivist Maximilien Schrems and its data protection association, None of Your Business (noyb). The crusade started in 2013, with a first step resulting in a resounding cancelation of the Safe Harbor framework, which allowed personal data to be freely transferred from the European Union to the United States, in the 2015 Schrems I case (see our Alert). It was subsequently followed by a same action against Safe Habor’s successor, the Privacy Shield Framework, leading to the same result in the Schrems II case (see our Alerts here, here and here).(more…)