ai-regulation

The EU Council and Parliament endorsed amendments delaying high-risk AI system deadlines by up to 16 months and banning nonconsensual deepfake imagery, as Amnesty International warns of a rights rollback.

The Trump administration released a seven-pillar legislative blueprint on March 20 that asks Congress to override state AI laws and adopt a light-touch federal approach, drawing opposition from both parties.

Two federal courts reached opposite conclusions on whether AI-generated legal materials are protected from discovery, while the Supreme Court declined to extend copyright to AI-authored works, leaving the legal profession to navigate a patchwork of emerging rules with no clear federal framework.

The UK government published its statutory report on copyright and AI on March 18, dropping its preferred opt-out exception for AI training after overwhelming opposition and signaling a shift toward market-led licensing and transparency obligations.

The EU Council agreed to delay high-risk AI system rules to late 2027 and 2028, adding a deepfake ban while drawing civil society warnings of deregulation disguised as simplification.

With EU AI Act disclosure rules taking effect in August 2026 and California's SB 942 already in force, the industry's C2PA content credential ecosystem faces a critical adoption shortfall that could undermine the entire provenance framework.

The Trump administration's 90-day clock runs out on March 11, forcing the FTC to declare how consumer protection law applies to AI and the Commerce Department to flag state AI laws for potential DOJ litigation.

As the Commerce Department's 90-day deadline approaches, a constitutional confrontation over AI governance is taking shape between the White House and state legislatures across the country.

Britain closes a legal loophole to bring AI chatbots under the Online Safety Act after Grok's non-consensual image scandal, with penalties reaching 10% of global revenue and a broader consultation on banning social media for under-16s.