The first stages of WMF 2024

In this speech, we explore the regulatory landscape introduced by the new European AI Act, with an enhanced focus on data-centric strategies for managing artificial intelligence systems. This discussion centers on how high-quality data underpins the compliance requirements and technical guidelines of the Act. We will delve into crucial aspects such as robustness, accuracy, and human oversight, emphasizing the role of data in achieving these metrics. As artificial intelligence reshapes industries and societies worldwide, understanding the regulatory framework that governs its deployment becomes increasingly important. By prioritizing a data-centric approach, we aim to dissect the complexities of the AI Act and propose innovative solutions that advocate for a future where data ethics and innovation are intertwined. Join us as we navigate through the implications of the AI Act and champion a data-driven future in AI regulation.

The approval of spot ETFs and Bitcoin's halving have reignited interest in cryptocurrencies. But in case of legal issues, can they be seized? Analysis of the reference regulations and prospects for an asset experiencing strong expansion but lacking legal precedents

The cookie-less, multi-announced scenario is really coming. What awaits us, especially for re-targeting and related activities? We will note the relevant regulatory changes (such as the DMA and the AI Act) and the decisions of the authorities (e.g. the IAB Europe case, the Cookie Pledge, etc.) that impact, as well as the implications and legal doubts of the new tools (such as Privacy Sandbox, Apple SKAN, Facebook Advanced Matching) and current practices (fingerprinting, web scraping, etc.).

Artificial intelligence, used to create texts or images, often generates extraordinary works. But are these works really creative? In this speech, we will discuss the guidelines dictated by the US Copyright Office, which indicate how and under what conditions works created with AI systems, such as ChatGPT and Midjourney, can be registered and protected by copyright, examining some recent cases.  We will give concrete and practical guidance on how to obtain rights to works in Italy.

In an interconnected digital world, digital rights play a crucial but often balancing role. The intersection of the right to be forgotten, reputation, transparency, moderation and new digital rights seem at odds but represent pieces of a single ecosystem. The ethical and legal challenges in protecting individual privacy while fostering digital transparency and the use of AI as a tool for online moderation and reputation maintenance will be discussed.

This speech will examine strategies for implementing effective security policies in small organizations that do not have a dedicated IT department. Special attention will be given to the collection and cataloging of data in a forensic manner, useful for preparing instructional elements to defend the assets and reputation of companies and professional firms in legal proceedings

Today, there are various regulations that require companies and public administrations that provide or use artificial intelligence systems to conduct assessments on the impacts of AI and how these systems comply with the law. This is the case, for example, with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): those intending to use an AI system must conduct a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA). Additionally, the AI Act, the new European law on artificial intelligence, requires conducting a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) when using an AI system. The same law also introduces the obligation to conduct a Conformity Assessment (CA) to demonstrate the compliance of one's AI system with the requirements of the AI Act. This speech will present the various assessments that businesses and public entities must conduct on their AI systems to comply with legal obligations. It will explain how to conduct these evaluations and with what methodologies, highlighting points of contact and differences, while also focusing on the benefits that can arise from their correct and timely completion

In the age of artificial intelligence, we find ourselves at the crossroads of innovation and ownership. The challenges surrounding AI-created inventions demand a closer look, from untangling the web of ownership rights to recognizing the collaborative efforts between humans and machines, and even contemplating the revolutionary idea of AI as inventors. Today, we explore the importance need for clear guidelines in this dynamic landscape. At the heart of the matter lies the question of intellectual Property ownership for AI-generated inventions. Without explicit guidelines, legal clarity, and comprehensive policies, the landscape becomes a breeding ground for ambiguity and potential disputes. To ensure a conducive environment for innovation and growth, it is essential to establish transparency which clearly defines ownership rights and responsibilities. Clear guidelines are the bedrock upon which the resolution of ownership challenges rests. These guidelines not only provide a roadmap for the direction of the complex terrain of AI ownership but also foster an environment conducive to innovation and collaboration. Without them, the potential benefits of AI technology may be hindered by legal uncertainties and disputes. Clear guidelines are not only a legal necessity; they are a catalyst for progress, ensuring that the fruits of AI's labour are attributed to the rightful owners. The narrative of AI inventions is one of collaboration, where human ingenuity merges with machine capabilities. This collaborative dance poses a challenge to traditional patent laws, designed primarily with human inventors in mind. Recognition of the unique contributions of both humans and machines is essential. Patent laws must adapt to acknowledge this symbiotic relationship, creating a legal framework that supports, rather than hinders, the collaborative nature of AI innovation. In this evolving saga, a provocative question emerges: can AI systems be recognized as inventors? And can humans who initiate the AI creation own the IP? As AI's autonomy and creativity expand, so does the need to reconsider our understanding of inventorship and intellectual property. The legal implications are profound, demanding a re-evaluation of existing frameworks to accommodate the changing dynamics of technological progress. The idea of AI as inventors challenges us to redefine creativity and innovation, sparking a paradigm shift in the legal landscape. In conclusion, the ownership challenges presented by AI inventions beckon us to establish clear guidelines, recognise the collaborative nature of human-AI partnerships and contemplate the groundbreaking notion of AI as inventors. As we stand at the threshold of technological progress, a commitment to clarity and adaptability in legal frameworks will not only resolve ownership challenges but will propel us into a future where innovation flourishes, unencumbered by legal uncertainties. Let us embrace this opportunity for progress and chart a course towards a harmonious coexistence of human ingenuity and artificial intelligence.