- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Neil Hodge2023-12-20T16:00:00
As the European Union’s AI Act sets its sights on 2026 to take full effect, experts are concerned other key jurisdictions—including the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and China—might introduce divergent legislation that treats artificial intelligence use differently, thus making it difficult for companies to ensure compliance.
This is an especially daunting prospect, said Alastair Paterson, chief executive officer of AI tech firm Harmonic Security, considering the current AI regulation landscape of “nice words but zero penalties” is “set to change—and fast.”
The AI Act’s main thrust is to regulate AI based on the technology’s capacity to cause harm. It follows a “risk-based” approach—the higher the risk, the stricter the rules.
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.
Concerns about how robustly European member states may enforce the EU AI Act, which took effect on Aug. 1, are divided between if regulators will take a “light touch” approach or a sledgehammer for noncompliance. One thing’s for sure, the pace of AI innovation will make enforcement very difficult.
The European Union’s AI Act follows a risk-based approach: the higher the risk the artificial intelligence poses, the stricter the rules. Understanding each category is key to compliance.
TikTok and X are under investigation related to their respective compliance with the European Union’s Digital Services Act, while the first three companies probed under the Digital Markets Act include Apple, Alphabet, and Meta.
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.
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority apologized to investors in peer-to-peer investment firm Collateral for not acting swiftly enough to prevent Collateral from defrauding its customers.
