Most Companies Lack an AI Ethics Framework at Their Own Potential Peril
With no laws specifically governing AI, companies are left to decide if they will implement a framework for ethical AI usage. But most don't, and lawyers say that could lead to substantial risks.
November 01, 2019 at 11:30 AM
3 minute read
Leveraging artificial intelligence can take companies' compliance efforts to new heights, but lawyers warn frameworks are needed to understand how the AI's decision-making correlates to the public's and regulators' concerns.
"The potential for AI technology is quite significant and the ability of the technology to make decisions, make recommendations, predictions or take actions is really revolutionizing a lot of sectors, but at the same time it presents questions about ethics," said Davis Wright Tremaine partner K.C. Halm.
However, when most companies are deploying their new tech, ethics is rarely a mainstay in the preparation conversation.
In the Deloitte "AI Ethics: An Emerging Imperative for the Board and C-Suite" survey of 600-plus executives at organizations that use AI, only 21% of respondents said they had a framework for ethical use of AI for risk-management and compliance efforts. An additional 26% said they didn't, but plan to develop a framework in the next 12 months.
Halm said companies' AI frameworks vary, but "some define the standard by which you work on bias, transparency and explainability. My view is, it is useful to have some type of AI framework in place to explain those issues."
As some organizations move toward implementing AI ethics frameworks, nearly half of respondents also said they are planning to leverage more AI in their risk management and compliance efforts during the next 12 months, according to the survey.
Deloitte risk and financial advisory principal Maureen Mohlenkamp said the uptick could be inspired by organizations attempting to increase automation, improve corporate culture or spot risky employee behavior. AI, she added, is "creating opportunities to really shift through massive data."
Still, Halm cautioned that before leveraging AI, a proactive and ongoing review of the tool is useful for any sector, especially for a technology that could lead to exclusion of members of a protected group.
"Health care, finance and housing—each of those sectors are pretty heavily regulated for good reasons, and many of those regulations focus on potential disparate impact that could be made if an AI tool is being used and if the training data is not representative of people being affected. It's a potential for bias," he said.
Phillips Nizer partner and former New York state Department of Financial Services deputy superintendent Patrick Burke added that outside of an AI-powered decision being potentially discriminatory, there is also the risk that regulators may ask questions if a company is "relying on [the AI tool] in lieu of more conventional compliance tactics."
However, for the time being, AI presents more ethical concerns than legal concerns. "At this point, it's more ethical concerns because the law hasn't caught up yet," Burke explained. Still, those ethical concerns could lead to public outcry and potential pushback from peers.
Companies leveraging AI will have to balance what's good for the bottom line with public perception.
"So much data is in big companies that they can get to the point where they can affect your life without you seeing it coming," Burke said. "I think Americans are becoming increasingly anxious about that, that ties into ethics. Do you do it anyway?"
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
© 2025 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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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