Generative AI is everywhere, including inside many law practices, creating documents, analyzing data, researching, and creating content. But what happens when AI makes a mistake? Who’s liable? The implications could be enormous, are we may see a new wave of liability litigation. It’s a brave, new world without a lot of legal guardrails.
There are existing, vague, nonspecific “tech” and business practice laws, then there emerging – AI specific – laws that aren’t backed by a lot of precedent from the courts. Privacy laws, data usage, intellectual property laws, even state and federal rulings, have created a jigsaw puzzle for lawyers to apply in the AI space.
Guest Graham H. Ryan is an experienced litigator and an author and frequently quoted commentator on tech issues and the emergence of generative AI and its consequences.
Ryan says it might help to look back to the “wild west” of the Internet’s earliest days and the infamous “Section 230” that has helped decide who’s liable for what when it comes to digital content. How far does Section 230 go when AI starts creating content instead of simply searching for it? And when does Congress get involved? Proceed with caution.
Resources:
International Association of Privacy Professionals, IAPP
IAPP “AI Governance Global 2024” conference
“The AI Industry Is Steaming Toward A Legal Iceberg,” Wall Street Journal quoting Graham Ryan
Harvard Journal of Law and Technology
“Department Of Justice’s Review Of Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act Of 1996,” U.S. Dept. of Justice
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, via SCOTUSblog
“Sanctions for Fake Generative AI Cites Harm Clients,” Bloomberg Law Analysis
“The EU Artificial Intelligence Act”
“Schumer Launches New Phase In Push For AI Bill,” Politico
American Bar Association
American Bar Association Litigation Section
