The recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) Advocate General's opinion in case C-203/22 is an important development in addressing how companies using artificial intelligence (AI) can balance automated decision transparency with the protection of trade secrets, while complying with the requirements of the GDPR.
X's suspension of processing certain personal data for training its AI chatbot tool, Grok, following the order by the Irish Data Protection Commission, mirrors actions taken by the Garante, the CNIL, and the Hamburg privacy authority in the past months. How will developers and deployers of artificial intelligence systems react to this?
A new study reveals a lack of knowledge among employees about how to use AI, which runs counter to C-level expectations that it will boost productivity; but are these managers aware that AI training and internal rules are mandatory under the EU's AI Act and could save their companies significant risks?
The Hamburg Data Protection Authority's position on the lack of personal data processing by LLMs during data storage, if combined with CNIL's recent view, might signal a substantial change in privacy authorities' approach to any data processing performed by generative artificial intelligence (AI).
The AI Act was published in the Official Gazette of the European Union and officially came into force. Is your company ready to comply with it?
The AI policy is the backbone of a compliance program on artificial intelligence, otherwise no regulatory framework and proper usage of AI can occur.
