Insight Type: Resources

UK AI Policy: Exploring the Policy and Its Implications

In an era dominated by technological advancements, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into various aspects of our lives is rapidly gaining momentum. The United Kingdom, recognising the significance of this transformative technology, is embarking on a comprehensive journey to revamp its digital landscape. As a follow-up to our article in May, ‘Navigating the Legal Landscape of Artificial Intelligence in the UK’, this article delves further into the UK’s current AI policy and its broader implications within the ongoing digital transformation.

The UK’s new regulatory framework for AI is more than just a standalone initiative. It is intricately woven into broader digital reforms that span online safety, content moderation, and data protection rules. The aim is to establish a “proportionate… and adaptable” approach to AI, as recently stated by AI Minister Jonathan Berry. This approach reflects the UK government’s commitment to fostering AI innovation while ensuring the well-being of its citizens in this evolving technological landscape.

In a recent debate in the House of Lords, Berry shed light on the alignment between the UK’s light-touch proposals and the legislative process. The AI white paper, ‘A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation’, published in late March this year, forms the foundation of these proposals. This holistic approach seeks to create a symbiotic relationship between the evolving legislation and the dynamic AI landscape.

However, the discussions within the parliamentary corridors reflect the evolving nature of this policy. Lawmakers, acknowledging the need for AI-specific legislation, are exerting pressure to introduce critical safeguards and safety measures. Berry acknowledged this pressure and emphasised the government’s readiness to adapt its approach to ensure responsible AI innovation. He stated, “We are unafraid to take further steps if needed to ensure safe and responsible AI innovation.”

The dynamism of the AI policy is further highlighted by an upcoming review scheduled for this autumn. As the government’s last legislative program of the 2022-23 parliamentary session is set to be unveiled in November 2023, there is a growing push to include legislation to regulate AI. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s stance, however, suggests focusing on existing regulatory channels for early AI development, underlining the nuanced considerations that underpin this policy.

Notably, the government has faced critique for what some perceive as a relaxed approach to AI regulation. Timothy Clement-Jones, the Co-Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence, criticised the “toothless exhortation” by sectorial regulators to adhere to ethical principles, calling for a more comprehensive and cross-sectorial approach to regulation.

This sentiment aligns with the perspective of Tina Stowell, Chair of the Communications and Digital Committee. Stowell, leading an inquiry into large language models, urged lawmakers to view AI regulation through a balanced lens that avoids being swayed by either overly optimistic or excessively pessimistic narratives. She emphasised the need to harness AI’s benefits while addressing its risks.

Central to this evolving landscape is the role of key regulators such as Ofcom and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The review process includes scrutinising their structure, capacity, and ability to navigate the intricacies of AI regulation. As the digital landscape transforms, the regulators’ readiness to adapt and evolve becomes paramount.

It is evident the UK’s AI policy is still evolving. Other jurisdictions such as the EU, US and China are adopting differing approaches to AI regulation. In particular, the EU’s preferred approach is much more prescriptive, instead opting to regulate the use and development of AI through the adoption of a ‘risk-based’, top-down legislative (via an ‘AI Act’) approach, with a centralised regulatory approach. Notably, the EU’s planned approach has received significant criticism and opposition from the AI community on the basis that such a prescriptive approach is not suitable for a technology such as AI which can advance rapidly in a short period of time.

Currently, in contrast, the UK’s AI policy is intricately interwoven with a broader digital revamp. Its decentralised, adaptive approach seeks to balance innovation with safeguards, drawing attention to both the transformative potential and potential risks of AI. Whilst there is clearly disagreement within parliament as to whether this is the best approach, it is arguable that this more flexible approach will allow the AI industry to help shape a more suitable type of AI regulation in the UK over time.

If you would like to discuss any of the issues mentioned in this article, please get in touch.

Conexus Law Launches New Service to Help Organisations Mitigate “Brexit Risk”

Conexus Law, the specialist provider of legal advice to businesses operating at the intersection of the built environment, technology and people, has launched a Brexit Contract Management and Audit Service. It is designed to help address the many unresolved issues following the Christmas Eve Agreement.

The new service will help organisations manage any potential contract risks and assess existing contractual arrangements that may require attention to ensure continuity of commercially viable relationships post BREXIT. It will include a full audit of all contracts including a review of standard terms and conditions (both signed and those under negotiation), and any bespoke contracts with both suppliers and customers, together with business contracts which touch every business area whether it be IT, purchasing, product, sales and marketing, office services, facilities maintenance, logistics or outsourcing.

In addition advice will be given as to whether a contract has a mechanism or opportunity to exit or re-negotiate its terms should this be necessary. While the service will focus on arrangements with EU suppliers or customers, it can include the full suite of contracts globally (including UK to UK contracts and UK to non-EU contracts).

Brexit will also impact trade between the UK and global markets and between the EU and global markets, with likely increased customs and duty requirements and costs. All of this will be taken into account when setting the scope of the contract audit.

Ed Cooke, Founder at Conexus Law, said: “Although The Christmas Eve Agreement gave some clarity, businesses continue to be faced with uncertainty. There are clear implications for many areas such as supply chains, imports and exports and employment that will affect the technology and datacentre sectors and our service will ensure full visibility of the commercial impact of Brexit on the business.”

HOW CAN CONEXUS LAW HELP?

Businesses and individuals will need legal advice to help them understand the risks they may face and the options that may be open to them.

We are available to assist in reviewing the laws in many jurisdictions across the world, and to review specific contracts. We are also available to provide practical, business-orientated advice on how to best protect yourself from the ongoing commercial effects of Brexit.

Contact

For further advice on mitigating Brexit risks, please contact Ed Cooke.

T: +44 (0)20 7390 0281
M: +44 (0)7535 123000
E: [email protected]

Boilerplate Clauses – The Devil is in the Detail

Tick box

Conexus Law, the specialist advisory firm that provides legal and commercial advice to clients who work in sectors where the built environment, technology, engineering and people converge, is warning companies to check the boilerplate clauses on all existing and future contracts in the light of the impact of Covid-19. The firm is warning that failure to do so could be costly and disruptive.

Ian Timlin, at Conexus Law, explains:

Boilerplate clauses, also known as standard, miscellaneous or general clauses, are generally found towards the end of most contracts or commercial agreements. They are normally standard commercial terms that do not vary much from one transaction to another. Boilerplate clauses are often not typically heavily negotiated, but they are important. They often regulate the operation of the contract (i.e. its duration, interpretation, transferability, and enforceability) and many contract disputes depend on the drafting of boilerplate clauses such as termination, force majeure, and entire agreement clauses.

Understandably when people are using an existing contract, for example a supplier agreement, they concentrate on the operative terms and conditions of the agreement and pay less attention to these standard provisions at the end of an agreement. However, many contract disputes depend on the drafting of boilerplate clauses such as termination, force majeure, and entire agreement clauses. This is particularly important during Covid-19 for organisations who are struggling to deliver a contractual service as a force majeure clause might allow for the suspension of performance as a result, for example, of quarantine or other employee restrictions.

(Of course if you now entering into new contracts it is worth considering adding a clause that specifies a pandemic, epidemic, outbreaks of infectious disease or any other public health crisis restrictions as an event of force majeure.)
In addition, most boilerplate clauses clarify the relationship between the contracting parties. Generally, subject to statutory restrictions and illegality, the parties to an English law contract are free to define their contractual relationship between each other which can provide certainty if terms in the contract are ever disputed.
This is especially important given the strain that Covid-19 has put on relationships throughout the supply chain, with many businesses now looking at their financial and logistical obligations to third parties to prepare and protect their operations and staff.

As a result, it is also worth noting that boilerplate clauses are also changing. In a limited supply marketplace, it is always worth considering having a standard clause that forces your counterparties to a contract to mediate before court proceedings can be instigated by one party against another which can save time and money. It can also help salvage a business relationship before parties become entrenched in their positions as a result of court proceedings.
However, just re-hashing clauses and omitting properly thought out boilerplate clauses may create uncertainty and expose certain elements of the relationship or agreement between parties open to interpretation in a court of law, which is often an expensive and unpredictable exercise.

Finally, it is worth checking these clauses for another reason. They may assist you in your commercial aspirations – you may be pleasantly surprised by what is hidden there!

HOW CAN CONEXUS LAW HELP?

Businesses and individuals will need legal advice to help them understand the risks they may face and the options that may be open to them.

We are available to assist in reviewing the laws in many jurisdictions across the world, and to review specific contracts. We are also available to provide practical, business-orientated advice on how to best protect yourself from the ongoing commercial effects of Covid-19.

Contact

For further advice on renegotiating your contractual obligations or pursing your contractual rights, please contact Ian Timlin.

T: +44 (0)20 7390 0280
M: : +44 (0)7767 427 332
E: [email protected]

International business faces post Brexit data threat warns legal expert

Laptop with padlock

From 1 January 2021 the United Kingdom will lose its automatic status as a safe destination for EU data when it falls outside of the EU’s legal jurisdiction. This will affect all EU data to be transferred to the UK (or any ‘third country’ that is not an EEA member.)

According to Phil Brown, a specialist lawyer at Conexus Law, it is doubtful that transfers from the EU to the UK will be compliant with GDPR following court case in October which held UK law incompatible with EU law – and similarly no transfers to the US would be compliant following a judgement in July 2020 which rendered Privacy Shield invalid.

“This clearly poses a huge threat to international business and it is hard to see that it will be allowed to continue, although equally the contrasting views of Europe and the US as to data protection mean it is a difficult one to see resolved without wholesale legislative changes to either the European or US regimes. The UK is clearly more aligned with the rest of Europe, and so one would hope that the differences can be resolved swiftly and effectively but given the political implications of Brexit across Europe there remains a distinct lack of clarity,” comment Phil.

Phil has created a guidance paper on the subject which outlines the possible options for businesses and likely outcomes.

HOW CAN CONEXUS LAW HELP?

Businesses and individuals will need legal advice to help them understand the risks they may face and the options that may be open to them.
We are available to assist in reviewing the laws in many jurisdictions across the world, and to review specific contracts. We are also available to provide practical, business-orientated advice on how to best protect yourself from the ongoing commercial effects of Covid-19.

Contact

For further advice on GDPR or pursing your contractual rights, please contact Philip Brown.

T: +44 (0)20 7390 0289
M: +44 (0)7887 538308
E: [email protected]