Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

Video Games, AI, and …the Law?

By Liisa Thomas, Julia Kadish & Dhara Shah on April 28, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Social-Media-and-Games-Blog-Gaming-Console2-Image_660x283

Video games have come a long way. They have morphed from simulated games of ping pong to today’s fully-immersive virtual reality games that leverage biometrics and artificial intelligence (AI). While the origins of using AI in games were simple – such as to create more realistic non-player characters  – the use of AI now allows for much more. AI-based tools may be used to outsource quality assurance, gain data-driven insights into players, or to better understand player value to maximize retention and in-game revenue. Now is thus a good time for companies to keep in mind regulatory bodies’ increased focus on the use of AI.

In the US, the FTC has provided guidance around the use of AI in ways that avoid unfair or deceptive trade practices. For video game publishers, as applied to the gaming industry, the FTC’s key considerations (which we also summarized in our sister blog) include:

  • Accuracy. AI components of a game or service should be tested prior to implementation to confirm it works as-intended.
  • Accountability. Companies should think about how the use of AI will impact the end- user. Outside experts may be used to help confirm that data being used is bias-free.
  • Transparency. End-users should be made aware that the company may use AI, it should not be used secretively. Individuals should know what is being collected and how it will be used.
  • Fairness. To further concepts of fairness, the FTC recommends giving people the ability to access and correct information.

State comprehensive privacy laws (such as the forthcoming laws we discussed in our sister blog, namely in California, Colorado, and Virginia) will also impact companies’ use of AI. These laws require companies to provide individuals with opt-out rights regarding AI in automated decision-making and profiling. They also mandate conducting data protection impact assessments for processing activities that pose a heightened risk- such as automated processing. In line with the FTC’s transparency principle, California’s CPRA also requires access requests to include information about the logic and outcome involved in such decision-making processes. NIST (a self-regulating industry body) has also proposed an AI risk management framework.

AI has received similar scrutiny in Europe (discussed in our sister blog), where the focus has been on providing transparency and oversight when using AI. This is particularly true when automated decision-making occurs. Like the states noted above, here a risk-based approach will be needed. At present, an AI Act is being considered, which would take these concerns into account.

Photo of Liisa Thomas Liisa Thomas

Liisa Thomas, a partner based in the Chicago and London offices, is Leader of the firm’s Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group.

Read more about Liisa ThomasEmail
Photo of Julia Kadish Julia Kadish

Julia Kadish is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm’s Chicago office and is a member of the Privacy and Cybersecurity Team.

Read more about Julia KadishEmail
Photo of Dhara Shah Dhara Shah

Dhara Shah is an associate in the Intellectual Practice Group in the firm’s Chicago office.

Read more about Dhara ShahEmail
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Blog:
    Game Counsel
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Coronavirus (COVID-19): Guidance for Businesses
  • GovCon & Trade
  • Pro Policyholder
  • The Way on FDA
  • Crypto Digest
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo