Legal Analysts

Showing posts with label artificial intelligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label artificial intelligence. Show all posts

Monday, November 06, 2023

NY's Bold Move: A Bill to End AI Discrimination in Housing

The New York State Legislature, in a groundbreaking move, has introduced a bill aimed at eliminating discrimination in housing-related AI systems. This initiative represents a significant step toward equitable technological progress and shines a light on a pervasive issue that affects countless individuals.

In a landmark move to safeguard equity and fairness in housing, New York State Senator Cleare has introduced Bill S7735, which aims to address potential discrimination through the use of automated decision-making tools in housing. The bill was read twice and is now committed to the Committee on Rules for further deliberation.

Automated decision tools, based on algorithms and artificial intelligence, are increasingly used by landlords and housing agencies to make decisions about who gets housing. While these tools can streamline processes, there is a growing concern that they may inadvertently discriminate against protected classes. Bill S7735 is set to provide a regulatory framework ensuring these tools are used responsibly and without discrimination.

Key Provisions of the Bill:
  • Definition and scope of automated decision tools.
  • Requirement for annual disparate impact analyses to assess potential discrimination.
  • Mandate for transparency and public reporting of the analyses.
  • Obligation for landlords to notify applicants when such tools are used.
  • Empowerment of the Attorney General and Commissioner to investigate and act upon violations.

Potential Impact:
This bill is a step forward in the use of technology in housing decisions, ensuring that while innovation continues to evolve, it does not come at the cost of fairness and discrimination-free practices.

Thursday, March 16, 2023

Copyrighting AI - Copyright Office Statement of Policy

On March 16, 2023, just two days after GPT-4's big release, the Copyright Office is getting into the AI game by addressing "the use of sophisticated artificial intelligence (“AI”) technologies capable of producing expressive material" in its Official Statement of Policy published in the Federal Register. 

To begin, the Statement of Policy asks the following questions with respect to Generative AI:

  1. whether the material they produce is protected by copyright?
  2. whether works consisting of both human-authored and AI-generated material may be registered?
  3. what information should be provided to the Office by applicants seeking to register them?

The Copyright Office, then, answers these question through the guise of the Copyright Act's "human authorship requirement," which is found in the definition of the term "author," as set forth by SCOTUS  in the case "Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony" to mean “he to whom anything owes its origin; originator; maker; one who completes a work of science or literature.” 

Thereafter, the Copyright Office posits that "when an AI technology receives solely a prompt from a human and produces complex written, visual, or musical works in response, the 'traditional elements of authorship' are determined and executed by the technology—not the human user." Stated otherwise, "[w]hen an AI technology determines the expressive elements of its output, the generated material is not the product of human authorship." In these scenarios, no copyright is available. 

However, where a human "select[s] or arrange[s] AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way," copyright is available. Additional, if the AI-generated material is modified, then a copyright is available. 

With respect to the information to be provided to the copyright office, the Statement of Policy explains that the "Author Created" field from the "Standard Application" to explicitly "claim the portions of the textual work that is human-authored." 

Finally, the Copyright Office leaves us with a teaser for later in the year when it will seek public comment later this year on "how the law should apply to the use of copyrighted works in AI training and the resulting treatment of outputs."