The European Union (EU) is considering a new legal framework that would significantly strengthen regulations for the development and use of artificial intelligence (AI).
The European Union (EU) is considering a new legal framework that would significantly strengthen regulations for the development and use of artificial intelligence (AI). The proposed Artificial Intelligence AI Act of EU would categorise AI systems according to risk and impose different requirements for their creation and application.
Many legislators in Europe emphasise the necessity of fostering AI innovation while also protecting the public as they continue to debate the specifics.
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, a proposed piece of legislation, is primarily concerned with tightening regulations regarding data quality, transparency, human oversight, and accountability.
Additionally, it aims to address ethical issues and implementation difficulties in a number of industries, including healthcare, education, finance, and energy.
Thierry Breton, the EU’s Commissioner for Internal Market, stated in a statement that “[AI] has been around for decades but has reached new capacities fueled by computing power.”
The Artificial Intelligence Act aims to “harness the potential of AI for industrial use, ensure that AI in Europe respects our values and rules, and strengthen Europe’s position as a global hub of excellence in AI from the lab to the market.”
A classification system that assesses the potential risk that AI technology poses to a person’s health, safety, or fundamental rights forms the basis of the AI Act. Four risk tiers are included in the framework: unacceptable, high, limited, and minimal.
There are few restrictions on the use of AI systems that pose little risk, such as spam filters and video games, with the exception of transparency obligations. Systems deemed to pose an unacceptable risk, such as real-time biometric identification systems in public places and government social scoring, are generally prohibited.
High-risk AI systems are allowed, but their creators and users must abide by rules that demand stringent testing, accurate data quality documentation, and an accountability framework with human oversight. Autonomous vehicles, medical equipment, and critical infrastructure machinery are just a few examples of AI that is considered to be high risk.
The EU proposed AI Act proposes steep non-compliance penalties for companies, with fines up to €30 million or 6% of global income. It also outlines regulations around general purpose AI, such as large language model generative AI systems like ChatGPT. The EU is taking the lead in attempting to make AI systems fit for the future we as humans want.
Margrethe Vestager, the Executive Vice-President for a Europe Fit for the Digital Age, further stated in a statement, “With these landmark rules, the EU is spearheading the development of new global norms to ensure AI can be trusted.” “Future-proof and open to innovation, our rules will only take action when absolutely necessary, such as when the safety and fundamental rights of EU citizens are in jeopardy.”
A European Artificial Intelligence Board would oversee the regulation’s implementation and guarantee uniform application throughout the EU. This is another goal of the proposed law. The organisation would be charged with formulating positions and suggestions on emerging issues as well as advising national authorities.
The Artificial Intelligence Act was originally proposed by the European Commission in 2021 and is currently under discussion in the European Parliament.
The board should reflect the interests of the AI eco-system and be composed of representatives of Member States. Ivan Bartoš, the Czech Deputy Prime Minister for Digitalization, said the Council’s adoption of the legislation achieved a delicate balance that will boost innovation and the uptake of artificial intelligence technology across Europe.
Once the European Parliament adopts its own position on the legislation, EU interinstitutional negotiations will begin to finalise and implement the law. Trilogues can vary significantly in time as lawmakers negotiate sticking points and revise proposals.