EU Unveils Plans to Regulate Artificial Intelligence
The European Commission's strategy does not immediately ban the use of AI for facial recognition, as many had expected. But the new strategy does address concerns about data privacy.
February 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM
3 minute read
The European Commission left the door open to using AI for facial recognition, defying expectations that the bloc would impose a total ban on the controversial technology.
Margrethe Vestager, the EU's digital policy chief, unveiled a strategy for artificial intelligence on Wednesday that aims to boost the use of AI in Europe while addressing concerns about data privacy.
"We want every citizen, every employee, every business to stand a fair chance to reap the benefits of digitalization," she said in a statement.
Vestager was expected to propose a ban on the use of AI for facial recognition in response to increasing public concern about how the technology threatens personal privacy.
Instead, the commission called for a debate on how exemptions could be made from the EU's strict data privacy rules to allow the use of AI for facial recognition.
"While today, the use of facial recognition for remote biometric identification is generally prohibited and can only be used in exceptional, duly justified and proportionate cases, subject to safeguards and based of EU or national law, the Commission wants to launch a broad debate about which circumstances, if any, might justify such exceptions," the report said.
A draft of the strategy from January called for a ban of up to five years on the use of AI for facial recognition.
The earlier draft said the "use of facial recognition technology by private or public actors in public spaces would be prohibited for a definite period (e.g. three to five years) during which a sound methodology for assessing the impacts of this technology and possible risk management measures could be identified and developed."
The strategy unveiled today takes a two-tier approach to AI by calling for strict rules for high-risk uses and a voluntary labeling scheme for low-risk applications.
"As AI systems can be complex and bear significant risks in certain contexts, building trust is essential," the EU report says.
"Clear rules need to address high-risk AI systems without putting too much burden on less risky ones. Strict EU rules for consumer protection, to address unfair commercial practices and to protect personal data and privacy, continue to apply," it says.
It also says that for high-risk cases, such as in health, policing, or transport, "AI systems should be transparent, traceable and guarantee human oversight."
For lower-risk AI applications, the Commission envisages a voluntary labeling scheme if they apply higher standards.
The commission on Wednesday also unveiled its digital strategy for the next five years, which aims to boost the use of data by EU companies so that they can compete better with U.S. and Asian companies that tend to be more advanced in the use of data.
|
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllKennedys and Irwin Mitchell Replace Longstanding Leaders
Asia's Top Stories 2024: Departures, Layoffs and Breakups at the Likes of Kirkland, Skadden and Mayer Brown
Hogan Lovells M&A Partner Returns to Baker McKenzie Ahead Australia Exit
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Miami Beach Hotel Sues Celebrity Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, Asserts It Won’t Be ‘Extorted'
- 2'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
- 3California Supreme Court to Weigh Reach of Peremptory Challenge Law
- 4Court Rules Thumbs-Up Emoji Can Constitute a Contract Agreement
- 5Delaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250