The EU’s AI Act Is Finalized; a Mixed Bag for Human Rights
| |
Earlier this month, the European Parliament agreed to the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act, a landmark piece of legislation that many will look to as a tone-setter for AI regulation globally. The vote was the final step towards the Act becoming EU law. CDT’s Europe Office noted that, while human rights and privacy protections run throughout the Act, the legislation’s final text leaves many of civil society’s previously articulated concerns and demands unaddressed.
“For those advocating for human rights, the AI Act is a mixed bag,” commented Laura Lazaro Cabrera, CDT Europe’s Counsel and Director of the Equity and Data Programme. “Whilst we can rightly celebrate that privacy and other human rights are foregrounded in the law, there are too many exemptions that could lead to harmful AI systems posing serious risks to citizens, particularly those in vulnerable situations such as at borders.”
The risks that remain include the law’s exemptions for facial recognition, which threaten to “swallow the rule” and allow for widespread facial scanning by law enforcement on the EU’s streets, and its exemption for national security, which could be over-exploited.
| |
 | EU AI Act Brief–Overview of the EU AI Act. Dark blue gradient background, white and yellow text.
|
|
In a blog post, CDT Europe summarized some of the AI Act's key features — its risk-based approach, its governance structure, and its requirements for general-purpose AI systems — and discussed the role of human rights in the law. In an additional briefing paper, our European colleagues looked closely at the AI Act's risk categories and corresponding mitigation measures, the obligations the AI Act creates for actors throughout the AI supply chain, and the various mechanisms and actors that play a role in ensuring oversight of AI systems.
We hope you’ll stay tuned: as implementation of the AI Act picks up speed, CDT Europe will release additional resources looking at further elements of the regulation.
| |
In Case You Missed It
— CDT signed onto a brief, led by ACLU, EFF and research scholar Riana Pfefferkorn, urging a Nevada District Court to reject Nevada’s motion to bar Meta from offering encrypted messaging services to youth in Nevada, exposing children to danger online. Nevada’s assault on encryption is without precedent: it is suing a tech company to deny an entire class of users the ability to communicate securely using its encrypted messaging app.
— CDT and 11 other organizations endorsed the Invest in Child Safety Act, critical bipartisan and bicameral legislation that would provide essential resources to law enforcement to protect children online, as well as resources to better support victims of child sexual abuse.
— CDT joined a coalition of over 90 civil society organizations and experts in speaking out in response to Meta’s news that it would abandon CrowdTangle, the tool used by tens of thousands of journalists, watchdogs, and election observers to monitor the integrity of elections around the world. We argued that the decision endangers both pre- and post election monitoring in a year where over half the world’s population will go to the polls, and called for Meta to, among other things, keep CrowdTangle functioning until January 2025.
| |
 | Black and yellow graphic logo for Vox's "Today, Explained" podcast.
|
|
CDT in the Press— Kate Ruane, Director of CDT’s Free Expression Project, joined Vox’s “Today, Explained” podcast to discuss the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which could result in a TikTok ban.
— CDT Policy Analyst Aliya Bhatia told The Guardian about proposed child safety laws like KOSA, “A one-size-fits-all approach to kids’ safety won’t keep kids safe. This bill still rests on the premise that there is consensus around the types of content and design features that cause harm. There isn’t, and this belief will limit young people from exercising their agency and accessing the communities they need to online.”
— CDT Vice President of Policy Samir Jain discussed Murthy v. Missouri, a case heard before the Supreme Court in mid-March, with Politico: “There are legitimate reasons for the government to communicate with social media companies… The answer is not ‘no more communication from the government to social media companies,’” Jain said.
— CDT President and CEO Alexandra Reeve Givens wrote for Zócalo about democracy and the digital public square.
| |
 | Illustration for CDT’s 2024 Spring Fling event. Blue and rose-colored text surrounded by light pink blossoms and orange bulbs.
|
|
CDT "in Person"— CDT is pleased to announce our 2024 Spring Fling, a celebration that will take place during IAPP’s Global Privacy Summit. Join us on Tuesday, April 2, from 8–10:30 PM at Dirty Habit in Washington, D.C. Ticket price goes up at the door—buy your ticket today!
— In the latest episode of CDT’s podcast, we sat down with Kate Ruane, Director of CDT’s Free Expression Project, and K.J. Bagchi, Vice President of the Center for Civil Rights and Technology, to discuss Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton — consolidated cases challenging the constitutionality of controversial social media laws in Texas and Florida, currently being considered by the Supreme Court.
| |
Partner Spotlight
CDT was delighted to work alongside civil society organizations to advocate for a better EU AI Act as part of its AI Coordination Group.
The AI Coordination Group, composed of civil society leaders, offered a space for participants to coordinate advocacy strategies and joint efforts during the negotiations of the EU AI Act. Informed by each of the represented organization’s expertise and strategic insight, the Coordination was able to robustly address key human rights concerns emerging from the Act. You can read about our reaction to the Act on our website.
| |
 | Ariana Aboulafia, wearing glasses and a blue suit and white collared shirt, in front of a CDT logo.
|
|
Staff Spotlight
Ariana Aboulafia, Policy Counsel, Disability Rights in Technology Policy
How long have you been working in digital rights? I first began working in digital rights as a fellow for the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative in 2019. After that, I spent two years as a public defender, and I am so happy to be back working at the intersection of digital and disability rights now at CDT.
What is your proudest moment while here at CDT? I think that my proudest moment thus far has been publishing an article in Slate on electronic visit verification and the ways in which technology and tech policies can facilitate discrimination against people with disabilities. The piece was published in July, on the anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
What is the most recent cultural activity you’ve been to? I recently saw Back to the Future on Broadway with my brother-in-law, and Sweeney Todd shortly thereafter with my sister. The shows are very different, but it is such a privilege to be able to enjoy live theater!
Dogs or cats? Dogs, all the way. All dogs, but especially poodles and doodles!
| |
|
|
|
|
