header-logo header-logo

16 October 2024
Issue: 8090 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Artificial intelligence , Privacy
printer mail-detail

AI regulation & GDPR: ‘nerdy’ but serious problems

The AI Act, GDPR, AI treaty and other regulation could hinder the development of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making, Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, has warned

Giving a speech to the Irish Law Society Industry Event last week, Sir Geoffrey said that, as technology advances, it is important ‘not to impede its beneficial adoption by premature regulation, before the dangers posed by those technologies are clearly understood’.

The EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act partially came into force in August. The UK, EU, USA and others have signed the Council of Europe’s Treaty on AI, human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Sir Geoffrey highlighted two ‘nerdy’ but ‘serious problems’—Art 22 of the GDPR, and the question of whether the owners of data used to train AI tools retain residual rights once the machine is in the public domain.

Article 22 protects the data subject’s right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling.

Sir Geoffrey said: ‘We may, I suppose, end up with a situation in which local authorities, Amazon and government pension authorities ask customers to consent to automated decision-making every time they contact you, just as we are asked 20 times a day to consent to cookies or additional cookies.’

Article 22 would also have repercussions if AI were to be used in judicial processes, he said, and ‘if AI were ever to be used in judicial decision-making, an automated decision could arguably not be effective’.

Issues over residual rights, such as licensing rights, in data used to train AI are likely to be ‘the subject of significant litigation in the future’, Sir Geoffrey predicted. He referred to a current dispute between Getty Images and Stability AI.

Sir Geoffrey said both problems were ‘created in part at least by regulation getting ahead of private law’.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll