REVIEW 2 cited by
Generative AI in EU Law: Liability, Privacy, Intellectual Property, and Cybersecurity
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Generative AI in EU Law: Liability, Privacy, Intellectual Property, and Cybersecurity
read the original abstract
The advent of Generative AI, particularly through Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and its successors, marks a paradigm shift in the AI landscape. Advanced LLMs exhibit multimodality, handling diverse data formats, thereby broadening their application scope. However, the complexity and emergent autonomy of these models introduce challenges in predictability and legal compliance. This paper delves into the legal and regulatory implications of Generative AI and LLMs in the European Union context, analyzing aspects of liability, privacy, intellectual property, and cybersecurity. It critically examines the adequacy of the existing and proposed EU legislation, including the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA) draft, in addressing the unique challenges posed by Generative AI in general and LLMs in particular. The paper identifies potential gaps and shortcomings in the legislative framework and proposes recommendations to ensure the safe and compliant deployment of generative models, ensuring they align with the EU's evolving digital landscape and legal standards.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
"I Just Don't Want My Work Being Fed Into The AI Blender": Queer Artists on Refusing and Resisting Generative AI
Queer artists largely refuse and resist generative AI, seeing it as anti-relational and disruptive to the community-oriented, identity-forming nature of their art practices, with only limited acceptance for surreal im...
-
Quantize with Confidence? An Empirical Study of Quantization for Code Generation
4-bit quantization of code LLMs mostly preserves pass@1, but AQLM matches or beats full precision while QuIP# degrades most on complex prompts; sensitivity is model-dependent.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.