Artificial intelligence is not only permeating the legal world and is thus becoming de facto ubiquitous in other spheres of everyday life. But with this rapidly growing phenomenon comes concerns about the impact on fundamental human rights, and naturally there is a demand for legal regulation. The EU has responded to this demand by proposing a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing harmonised rules for artificial intelligence (the so-called AI Act). In this article we will therefore look at some of the legal aspects of AI and outline some key areas.
The basic building block for the regulation of artificial intelligence is the aforementioned Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), which is accompanied by strong currents of opinion from the Member States, especially the voice of the three largest European economies, which significantly influences the form of the AI Act itself (more on this topic in the article by my colleague Mgr. Ondřej Cicvárk here).
A concept that has already been mentioned many times, such as data protection, certainly cannot be left out of the topic of artificial intelligence and must not be neglected. In the context of personal data, attention should be paid to the GDPR, which addresses this issue and also covers the field of artificial intelligence.
To define the concept of personal data, it is sufficient to use the definition of the GDPR Regulation, which explicitly states that personal data is any information about an identified or identifiable natural person (Article 4(1) of the GDPR Regulation).
Nowadays, you will probably most often associate artificial intelligence with a chatbot with which you share some of your personal data or other personal information, and it is therefore necessary to know your rights in this context and not to neglect the importance of this sharing. So we have discussed this in more detail in the context of OpenAI and privacy in an article that you can read here.
The current national legislation focusing on damages is not well suited to deal with product liability claims in the context of artificial intelligence, which is why the AI Act works with this in conjunction with the new Product Liability Directive.
Given that the specific characteristics of AI, whether in terms of its complexity, autonomy or a kind of opacity, can make it disproportionately difficult for injured parties to identify the liable party and successfully pursue a claim for damages, there is an attempt to substantially improve the position of injured parties and the potential proof of harm caused by an AI system.
Thus, this will typically be the case where the injured party can prove that the AI system does not comply with the requirements of the AI Regulation or other legislation (i.e. relevant national or EU legislation), using the presumption that the defendant (i.e. the AI system) has culpably breached the relevant duty and therefore causation of the damage will be presumed.
The question on everyone's mind is whether artificial intelligence will replace us in the employment law environment and how the industry will evolve. First of all, it has to be said that AI is not a threat to the majority of the industry at the moment. Rather, it is becoming a very usable tool, for example, in HR.
Artificial intelligence is thus essentially revolutionising the way companies approach recruitment, employee management and talent development. Thanks to advanced algorithms and machine learning, HR professionals (and not only) can focus on the strategic aspects of their work, while other tasks can be taken over by AI. That's why we didn't hesitate to become the first law firm in the country to have its own AI team, which we reveal more about here.
So, in relation to the use of AI in the work environment, we definitely recommend drafting an internal directive or guidelines that instruct employees in sufficient detail on the handling of AI. This can prevent irreparable damage in such sensitive areas as personal data.
Some people are already using artificial intelligence to create various texts, photomontages, images or audio-visual recordings that would in many cases enjoy copyright protection if they were created by humans. However, this is not the case for artificial intelligence in the current situation.
According to Act No. 121/2000 Coll., the Copyright Act (the "Copyright Act"), the subject of copyright is a literary and other artistic work and a scientific work which is the unique result of the author's creative activity, i.e. the author's own intellectual creation, and is expressed in any objectively perceptible form, including electronic form.
According to the currently applicable legislation, not only Czech but also European, a creation generated by artificial intelligence does not enjoy copyright protection, precisely because of the absence of creative activity of a physical person, i.e. a human author. More about this topic was revealed in her article by our colleague Mgr. Kateřina Nováková here.
The Municipal Court in Prague has already expressed its opinion on the topic of copyright and artificial intelligence, stating that an image created by artificial intelligence does not constitute a work of authorship under Section 2 of the Copyright Act, as it does not meet the conceptual characteristics of a work of authorship; it is not a unique result of the creative activity of a natural person - the author*. This judgment could thus provide direction in the decision of other similar cases.
Conclusion
Artificial Intelligence is definitely a topic that resonates throughout society and we are ready to help you along the way. We have a lot of experience with the implementation of artificial intelligence, as you can read here, and we will be happy to share it with you at various trainings, such as for the Czech Banking Association or with you.
________________________________________
