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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll