top of page
Writer's pictureThe Analyst

AI and Global Law - The change of business as we know it

The AI revolution is an impeding movement driven by Eastern Asia and has created widespread debate throughout the entirety of the world. Of course, in a perfect world modern technology and law should work in a symbiotic relationship, one in which both aspects progress at the same rate. However, the growing controversy of AI has thus induced worry and hysteria, stagnating the progression of legislation, instead of helping the global law, AI seems to have stunted it, leaving many unsure of the future impacts it could have on both daily and professional life.


Interestingly, AI is not a new stakeholder within the global market. The first notable detection of this technology was in 1957, at the Dartmouth Conference, the American government met this with strong enthusiasm as this gave them a notable one up against the USSR - especially with regards to the mounting Arms Race. However, the preoccupation with the development of the Space Race, Arms Race and then the resolution of conflict later in the 1970s, the focus on AI dissipated and went largely under government radar. That was until the early 2000s, with the rise of new powerful computing machines through large scale companies such as Apple and Google. Evidently, this was the first time this new technology had amassed such attention and thus the most notable question of privacy became increasingly present within the minds of most. 


How does one balance the new technology? How does one manage both the extreme amounts of joy AI brings about and yet still protect millions of individuals from the mass danger AI also brings about? One of the most poignant aspects criticised by the masses is AI’s ‘human-like’ qualities, rendering them somewhat eerie and uneasy. Ultimately, allowing AI to take over some human dominated employments as legislative matters become completed to a more efficient and precise degree. In the cases of both startups and established organisations, AI has increasingly become a tool to support IP production, more so in the development and production of Patents. The development of patents is instrumental to the development and exploration of ideas and goods at an early stage, without the worry or fear of interception from another firm or corporation. Patent protection is vital for safeguarding purposes and technology which is generated from research and development efforts. By obtaining patents, companies can restrict others from using their technologies without authorization and licence their technology to third parties 


The main stakeholders of this advancement remain those who pioneered the AI revolution itself. In fact, 17/20 of academic patterns are directly from Chinese universities and thus the remaining 3/20 come from South Korean universities. Moreover, out of every 500 patterns, 100 are Chinese, 20 are Korean, a further 20 are from the USA, Japan have 4 and finally Europe collectively has 4 as well. Thus, the focus on patents and their significance for the impact on the Global Market lead to a revision on IP standards in order to balance the wider economy. The following rules were implemented as a result: the imposition of human authorship vs AI generation of new creations, the patenting of academia now considered human presence essential. As a result, the EU has grown closer to AI in order to try and guide the revolution itself, aligning itself with these revised IP standards. So why is there still this lingering controversy?



AI technologies often involve complex algorithms and systems that can be difficult to describe in a way that meets the requirements for a patent.Furthermore, it can be challenging to illustrate that the invention is new and non-obvious, as well as to describe the specific invention in notable detail to allow someone skilled in the field to understand how to both make and use it. Moreover, there is conflict within the idea of AI’s relationship with employment, seeing as it may lead to job displacement in sectors such as:  manufacturing, data entry, and customer service. In addition, how does one ensure AI does not discriminate against certain stakeholders and is able to maintain utter transparency the same way a human individual may be able to do?

In conclusion, it becomes evident that the growing prominence of AI technology within the financial sphere induces a multitude of problems, both socially and with regards to global law. Although vast improvements have been introduced thoroughly through trade blocs such as the EU, the controversy and fear mongering element of AI is far from dissipated. Thus changing the way firms operate within their earliest stages of development, navigating the challenges of the impeding presence of AI within a firm’s life.


Notes from ‘Global Law of New Technology and Business’ - A class from Bocconi University Summer School


Written by Aurore Lebrun



801 views4 comments

Recent Posts

See All

4 bình luận


Khách
04 thg 5

This article is fabulous. The way one depicts the fervour of law contrasted by the engrossed technical ai creates a troubling yet powerful discussion

Thích

Khách
04 thg 5

Great Idea Aurore

Thích

Khách
17 thg 2

insightful

Thích

Khách
13 thg 2

wow!

Thích
bottom of page