In two recent episodes of the podcast I host, Technically Legal, the issue of whether the legal industry needs its own specialized or “purpose-driven” artificial intelligence has come up. Both guests on those episodes believe that legal does, in fact, need its own AI.
Cecilia Ziniti, Co-founder and CEO of GC.ai, says
On March 18, 2026, the UK government published its report (the Report) and impact assessment on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems, following the UK Government’s consultation on Copyright and AI which launched in December 2024.
The Consultation
The Consultation aimed to explore how copyright could best support the potential of AI while protecting the UK’s position as a “creative powerhouse.” It set out four policy options, and indicated that the UK government’s preferred proposal at the time of the Consultation was option 3:
On March 18, 2026, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced the TRUMP AMERICA AI Act: formally, The Republic Unifying Meritocratic Performance Advancing Machine Intelligence by Eliminating Regulatory Interstate Chaos Across American Industry Act. This massive, 291 page bill sets out to establish the first comprehensive federal framework for artificial intelligence regulation in the United
On 18 March 2026, the European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (“IMCO”) and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (“LIBE”) adopted their joint negotiating position on the European Commission’s proposed Digital Omnibus on AI (which we previously analysed here). The position will now proceed to a plenary
This past weekend, we saw an ad posted on YouTube attacking Democratic Senatorial candidate James Talarico – using words that were apparently from his own tweets, commenting on a number of social issues. What made the ad notable was that the words from the tweets were not just displayed on the screen or read by some anonymous announcer, but instead they were stitched together and read in what was seemingly Talarico’s own voice accompanied by a very convincing AI image of Talarico himself, and interjections were included where his AI image said approvingly things about the tweets like “I remember this one” and “so true.” It is only apparent that the ad was not an actual recording of Talarico delivering the message by a small disclaimer in one corner of the ad labeling it “AI Generated.” The ad is a very convincing portrayal of Talarico, and we expect similar ads will show up during the course of the current election cycle. Broadcasters and all other media companies need to be ready to deal with ads like these and comply with all legal obligations that apply to such advertising.
We have written before about the efforts during the last administration by the FCC, the Federal Election Commission (see our note here and our article here), and by Congress to regulate the use of AI in political ads on a national level. Those efforts did not lead to national rules on such uses. However, the majority of states have adopted some rules for the use of AI in political ads. For media companies, the biggest issue is that these rules are not uniform but instead impose different obligations to avoid legal liability.
We last wrote extensively about the state laws affecting the use of artificial intelligence in political ads about two years ago, when only 11 states had adopted such rules. Since then, more than 20 other states have adopted rules – and the obligations they impose are all over the board. Some states (like Minnesota) make it illegal to use AI in political ads to portray a candidate doing something that they did not actually do unless the candidate consents. Most do not go that far but instead require some form of disclosure (like that in the anti-Tallarico ad, except that in many states, the required text for the disclosures is far more extensive, though those disclosure obligations are not uniform and, in a few states, the disclosure requirements are inconsistent in the state’s own criminal and civil statutes).
Google says it has joined a new international industry accord aimed at strengthening the fight against online scams and fraud. The announcement was made at the UN Global Fraud Summit in Vienna, where a group of major companies said they would work together on threat intelligence sharing, scam detection and cross-border enforcement support.
Google has
The hype machine is working overtime on Agentic AI. Don’t fall for it.
AI chatbots merely respond to prompts. They only give you information. AI agents like Claude Cowork or Openclaw go beyond this. They are built on large language models, but can take action on your behalf. That sounds great, but there is a
Last Friday in Covent Garden, a street performer pulled me into his act.
“Where are you from?”
“America.”
The boos came right on cue. Not playful. Not ironic. Real boos. Not from everyone—but from enough to feel it.
And yes, I knew they were coming. Anyone paying attention to how the world currently sees the
Over the last 21 years that I have been writing this blog I have often posted about an annual corporate law seminar in New Orleans called the Tulane Corporate Law Institute, that I am attending again this year. Started by the late great Delaware Supreme Court Justice Andrew G.T. Moore over 30 years ago,
With the Colorado legislative session coming to its waning days, many have been eagerly waiting for Colorado AI Act amendment proposals. Absent an amendment, the Colorado AI Act will go into effect as-is on June 30, 2026. This week, the AI Policy Working Group (“Working Group”) released its Proposed Bill. The Working Group’s proposed
