<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<export-example>
  <doc>
    <id>4419</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2022</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst/>
    <pageLast/>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>March 2022</issue>
    <volume/>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName/>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2022-05-16</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">Reflections on the EU’s AI Act and How We Could Make It Even Better</title>
    <abstract language="eng">Jurisdictions around the world are preparing regulations for artificial intelligence, as investments in AI technologies continue to increase as a source of efficiency and innovation for companies and governments. One of the most influential regulative proposals for AI is that proposed by the European Commission in April 2021, the “AI Act.” The EU’s proposed regulation has already inspired some international regulative proposals and is likely to broadly impact AI policies around the world. Yet the Act is still in process, it’s strengths could be compromised, or it’s weaknesses addressed.  In this piece, we analyze the core policy concepts of the AI Act, with focus both on those worth amending and defending. These discussions may provide valuable elements for other regions beyond the EU to consider for their own AI policy. While the AI Act could still be improved to make it even more robust in managing AI-related risks to health, safety, and fundamental rights, and to increase incentives to industry to take actions beneficial to both itself and others, overall we applaud this act.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="eng">TechREG™ Chronicle</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="url">https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/category/techreg-chronicle/techreg-chronicle-2022/techreg-chronicle-march-2022/</identifier>
    <identifier type="url">https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/reflections-on-the-eus-ai-act-and-how-we-could-make-it-even-better/</identifier>
    <enrichment key="opus.source">publish</enrichment>
    <enrichment key="opus.doi.autoCreate">false</enrichment>
    <enrichment key="opus.urn.autoCreate">true</enrichment>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Meeri Haataja</author>
    <editor>Samuel Sadden</editor>
    <submitter>Terri Sullivan</submitter>
    <author>Joanna Bryson</author>
    <editor>Andrew Leyden</editor>
    <collection role="AY" number=""/>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>5021</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2023</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst>707</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>718</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>3</issue>
    <volume>4, Series 2</volume>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName/>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2023-06-16</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">The European Parliament’s AI Regulation:  Should We Call It Progress?</title>
    <abstract language="eng">The European Union (EU) has been leading the world with its influential digital regulation. However, the EU’s legislative process is sufficiently complex and careful that some national legislation clearly influenced by the EU’s AI Regulation is already in place in other countries, before the law has even been finalized in the EU. Meanwhile, other states and regions are just beginning to develop AI policy. For both the EU and such others, we here describe the outcomes of the first round of legislative action by one of the EU’s two legislative bodies, the European Parliament, in terms of modifying the Artificial Intelligence Act. The Parliament has introduced a number of changes we consider to be enormously important, some in a very good way, and some in a very bad way. At stake is whether the AI Act really brings the power and strength of product law to continuously scale improved practice on products in the EU with intelligent components, or whether the law becomes window-dressing aimed only at attacking a few elite actors post hoc. We describe here the EU process, the changes and our recommendations.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="eng">Amicus Curiae</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="url">https://journals.sas.ac.uk/amicus/article/view/5612</identifier>
    <identifier type="doi">10.14296/ac.v4i3.5612</identifier>
    <enrichment key="opus.source">publish</enrichment>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Joanna Bryson</author>
    <submitter>Hertie School Centre for Digital Governance</submitter>
    <author>Meeri Haataja</author>
    <collection role="HertieResearch" number="">Centre for Digital Governance</collection>
    <collection role="Faculty" number=""/>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
  </doc>
</export-example>
