Where Legal Minds explore the Future of AI

Parents of two Texas children have sued Character Technologies, claiming its chatbot, Character.AI, exposed their kids (ages 17 and 11) to self-harm, violence, and sexual content. Filed by the Social Media Victims Law Center and Tech Justice Law Project, the suit seeks to shut down the platform until safety issues are addressed. It also names the company’s founders, Google, and Alphabet Inc. as defendants.

Plaintiffs Dow Jones & Company, Inc., NYP Holdings, Inc., and corporate parent News Corporation have renewed their intellectual property (IP) complaint against artificial intelligence (AI)-powered “answer engine” Perplexity AI in the District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The court in Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence granted Ross’s request for interlocutory appeal on whether Westlaw’s headnotes are original and if Ross’s limited use (0.076%) qualifies as fair use. The court acknowledged differing legal opinions on these core issues, which could reshape the trial and have major implications for AI and copyright law.

In its most recent effort to keep pace with advancing technology, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently issued two draft guidances on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the context of drugs, biologics, and medical devices.

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to develop at a rapid pace, even the most sophisticated general counsel (GC) and in-house legal teams will be hard pressed to keep up with the evolving legal landscape.

In the last year, state activism in healthcare consumer protection has surged, with new laws that heighten oversight of for-profit investors’ engagement with healthcare marketplaces and scrutinize pharmaceutical pricing practices. As part of this activism, several state legislatures have enacted laws regulating use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare delivery.