Analysing the UK, EU and US approaches to AI regulation

The development of AI has been met with both excitement and concern. While some see the potential for innovation and economic benefits, others worry about the misuse of the technology and the harm it could cause. An open letter signed by prominent figures in the industry called for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. Meanwhile, others believe that AI is the future and compare it to electricity in its transformative power. Despite these differing views, there is a consensus that responsible regulation is needed to tame this beast. However, there is no agreement on how to regulate AI on a global scale, posing a challenge for the future. In this article, the IAPP compares the different regulatory approaches being taken by the UK, the EU and the US.

A related IAPP article written by EURACTIV Journalist Luca Bertuzzi reports that the development of generative artificial intelligence appears to be outpacing regulation. There are even doubts concerning the relevance of the proposed EU Artificial Intelligence Act. As a result, there is a growing competition to create universal AI governance, with the data protection authorities of EU member states positioning themselves to regulate AI within their borders.

Meanwhile, the Financial Times (£) reports Many of Europe's largest companies, including Siemens and Airbus, are concerned about the EU's proposed AI regulation. Over 150 executives have signed an open letter stating that the rules could harm competitiveness and fail to address potential challenges. While AI presents an opportunity to lead in technology, the regulation may stifle progress. The letter was sent to the European Commission, parliament, and member states.