Brian Higgins

Does Illinois’ Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Bill Fully Address Biometric Data Privacy Concerns?

By Brian Higgins on June 22, 2019

Developers of artificial intelligence-based video interviewing systems promote their technology as one that helps human resource professionals on-board new talent faster, less expensively, and with greater insight compared to traditional human-only interviewing techniques. They also contend that their systems can avoid some of the potential implicit biases that may appear before, during, and after interviews, thus reducing risks to companies while leveling the playing field for qualified job applicants. But because those AI system have…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

California Court Agrees With Autonomous Driving Company’s Source Code Misappropriation Claims, Issues Preliminary Injunction

By Brian Higgins on May 27, 2019

In WeRide Corp. v. Huang et al., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order granting a motion for a preliminary injunction and expedited source code discovery. In doing so, the court concluded that plaintiff’s source code for Level 4 highly autonomous vehicles (HAVs) was a protected trade secret under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Cal-UTSA). The court also concluded that plaintiff…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

Civil Litigation Discovery Approaches in the Era of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Technologies

By Brian Higgins on May 18, 2019

For nearly as long as computers have existed, litigators have used software-generated machine output to buttress their cases, and courts have had to manage a host of machine-related evidentiary issues, including deciding whether a machine’s output, or testimony based on the output, can fairly be admitted as evidence and to what extent. Today, as litigants begin contesting cases involving aspects of so-called intelligent machines–hardware/software systems endowed with machine learning algorithms and other artificial intelligence-based models–their…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

Congress, States Introduce New Laws for Facial Recognition, Face Data – Part 2

By Brian Higgins on April 12, 2019

In Part I, new proposed federal and state laws governing the collection, storage, and use of face (biometric) data in connection with facial recognition technology were described. If enacted, those new laws would join Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), California’s Consumer Data Privacy Act (CCPA), and Texas’ “biometric identifier” regulations in the governance of face-related data. It is reasonable for businesses to assume that other state laws and regulations will follow, and with them…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

Congress, States Introduce New Laws for Facial Recognition, Face Data – Part I

By Brian Higgins on March 30, 2019

Companies developing artificial intelligence-based products and services have been on the lookout for laws and regulations aimed at their technology. In the case of facial recognition, new federal and state laws seem closer than ever. Examples include Washington State’s recent data privacy and facial recognition bill (SB 5376; recent action on March 6, 2019) and the federal Commercial Facial Recognition Privacy Act of 2019 (S. 847, introduced March 14, 2019). If…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

Government Plans to Issue Technical Standards Governing Artificial Intelligence Technologies

By Brian Higgins on February 20, 2019

On February 11, 2019, the White House published a plan for developing and protecting artificial intelligence technologies in the United States, citing economic and national security concerns among other reasons for the action. Coming two years after Beijing’s 2017 announcement that China intends to be the global leader in AI by 2030, President Trump’s Executive Order on Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence lays out five principles for AI, including “development of appropriate technical standards…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

Washington State Seeks to Root Out Bias in Artificial Intelligence Systems

By Brian Higgins on February 6, 2019

The harmful effects of biased algorithms have been widely reported. Indeed, some of the world’s leading tech companies have been accused of producing applications, powered by artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, that were later discovered to exhibit certain racial, cultural, gender, and other biases. Some of the anecdotes are quite alarming, to say the least. And while not all AI applications have these problems, it only takes a few concrete examples before lawmakers begin to take…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

What’s in a Name? A Chatbot Given a Human Name is Still Just an Algorithm

By Brian Higgins on January 19, 2019

Due in part to the learned nature of artificial intelligence technologies, the spectrum of things that exhibit “intelligence” has, in debates over such things, expanded to include certain advanced AI systems. If a computer vision system can “learn” to recognize real objects and make decisions, the argument goes, its ability to do so can be compared to that of humans and thus should not be excluded from the intelligence debate. By extension, AI systems that…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

The Role of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Patent Law

By Brian Higgins on December 16, 2018

Although the notion of “explainable artificial intelligence” (AI) has been suggested as a necessary component of governing AI technology, at least for the reason that transparency leads to trust and better management of AI systems in the wild, one area of US law already places a burden on AI developers and producers to explain how their AI technology works: patent law. Patent law’s focus on how AI systems work was not borne from a Congressional…

Artificial Intelligence Technology and the Law Blog

California Appeals Court Denies Defendant Access to Algorithm That Contributed Evidence to His Conviction

By Brian Higgins on October 31, 2018

One of the concerns expressed by those studying algorithmic decision-making is the apparent lack of transparency. Those impacted by adverse algorithmic decisions often seek transparency to better understand the basis for the decisions. In the case of software used in legal proceedings, parties who seek explanations about software face a number of obstacles, including those imposed by evidentiary rules, criminal or civil procedural rules, and by software companies that resist discovery requests. The closely-followed issue…

Brian Higgins

Brian Higgins Blogs

Blog Authors

Does Illinois’ Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Bill Fully Address Biometric Data Privacy Concerns?

California Court Agrees With Autonomous Driving Company’s Source Code Misappropriation Claims, Issues Preliminary Injunction

Civil Litigation Discovery Approaches in the Era of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Technologies

Congress, States Introduce New Laws for Facial Recognition, Face Data – Part 2

Congress, States Introduce New Laws for Facial Recognition, Face Data – Part I

Government Plans to Issue Technical Standards Governing Artificial Intelligence Technologies

Washington State Seeks to Root Out Bias in Artificial Intelligence Systems

What’s in a Name? A Chatbot Given a Human Name is Still Just an Algorithm

The Role of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Patent Law

California Appeals Court Denies Defendant Access to Algorithm That Contributed Evidence to His Conviction

Company

Support

New to the Network

Brian Higgins Blogs

Blog Authors

Latest from Brian Higgins