- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Kyle Brasseur2024-06-03T08:58:00
The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division is examining how its policies and enforcement mechanisms are suited to handle potential issues brought about by the proliferation of use of artificial intelligence (AI).
Jonathan Kanter, head of the Antitrust Division, delivered remarks at an AI workshop at Stanford on Thursday, during which he said the agency was “actively examining the AI ecosystem both through our policy work … and through our enforcement of the Sherman Act and Clayton Act.”
“If firms in the AI ecosystem violate the antitrust laws, the Antitrust Division will have something to say about it,” he said.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
A hospitality company agreed to pay $3.5 million and appoint an anti-trust compliance officer to settle allegations by the Department of Justice that it engaged in illegal pre-merger activity.
The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division created a new task force to examine collusion and monopolies in the healthcare industry.
Prudent chief compliance officers should ensure artificial intelligence-related risks are being properly addressed at their businesses considering growing scrutiny being paid to the technology by the Department of Justice.
Breaches of the EU’s GDPR can cost companies substantial sums and huge reputational damage. Now some are warning that the implementation of the EU’s AI Act will be just as far-reaching, and could potentially lead to similar numbers of cases.
Any product that uses AI needs to be safety assessed for its entire lifespan under new rules that went into effect recently across the EU. Experts warned companies using AI to tailor products could be classed as “manufacturers” and face the same duty of care as developed.
When lawmakers slam the U.K.’s chief financial regulator as “incompetent,” it not only opens the doors for others to pile criticism on it, but it sparks a debate about how the organization can be improved–or removed.
