Rules framed as too complex, overlapping, or ambiguous to comply with; simplification as the fix.
By year
By actor type
By jurisdiction
Newest first
“There is no doubt future administrations will attempt to do the same when it comes to AI. Unless further guardrails against this kind of graft are put in place or Congress finally acts to deliver a national AI framework, we are concerned the collaborative framework President Trump has put forward will not remain voluntary.”
Qualified support of EO 14409's voluntary approach; coded oppose relative to a mandatory review requirement.
“DIGITALEUROPE urges co-legislators to formally request a separate proposal postponing the entry into application of the high-risk AI requirements, to be adopted under accelerated procedures. This would provide immediate legal certainty for companies and authorities, avoid a compliance cliff driven by missing standards and guidance, and remove the artificial time pressure currently distorting the legislative debate.”
“The Secretary of State must now definitively rule out any new copyright exception, bringing an end to the uncertainty created by this prolonged process over the past year. This will send a clear message to AI developers that they must enter into licensing agreements with the UK’s media and creative copyright owners”
“The adjustments to the AI Act provide companies with more realistic timelines. Unfortunately, the Omnibus misses critical opportunities to raise the outdated compute threshold for identifying AI models which pose a ‘systemic risk’, and fails to fix problematic wording on the extraterritoriality of copyright provisions, which conflicts with EU and international principles.”
“Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI. We have carefully reviewed the European Commission's Code of Practice for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and Meta won't be signing it. This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act.”
Speaker: Joel Kaplan, Chief Global Affairs Officer, Meta.
“While the code’s safety and security measures have been streamlined for greater clarity, they remain overly prescriptive and disproportionate – for example, with respect to external evaluations. Furthermore, key measures in the final code still go beyond the AI Act’s agreed scope and objectives, subjecting potential signatories to burdensome requirements.”
“To address the uncertainty this situation is creating, we urge the Commission to propose a two-year “clock-stop” on the AI Act before key obligations enter into force, in order to allow both for reasonable implementation by companies, and for further simplification of the new rules.”
Open letter signed by 40+ European CEOs incl. Airbus, ASML, Mistral AI, Lufthansa, BNP Paribas, Philips, Mercedes-Benz.
“A bold ‘stop-the-clock’ intervention is urgently needed to give AI developers and deployers legal certainty, as long as necessary standards remain unavailable or delayed.”
“The RAISE Act would create a legal minefield for New Yorkers trying to innovate by imposing vague, unworkable standards that punish developers instead of bad actors. This bill would stifle AI tech development, harm economic competitiveness and undermine free expression. NetChoice urges Governor Hochul to veto this misguided legislation and support a clear, national approach to AI governance”
“this legislation that provides balanced and effective protections for all individuals against exploitative uses of their voice and likeness while supporting free speech, reducing litigation and achieving the promise of AI technology”
“The EU needs rules to address the legal gaps left by the AILD withdrawal and ensure a fairer, simpler path to compensation for all people affected by AI systems, including consumers in the EU, in case of harm by an AI system.”
Joint letter with ARTICLE 19, ECNL, CDT Europe, Enforce and Mozilla.
“In addition, we urge the administration to clarify that existing copyright law protects the ability of developers to train models. Getting this right is critical to ensuring American competitiveness in AI.”
“The government’s consultation, along with its preferred policy option on AI and copyright, fails to address the real issue. The UK’s gold standard copyright law is already clear; what is missing is robust enforcement and transparency requirements that empower creative businesses to assert their rights.”
News Media Association (UK); statement of chief executive Owen Meredith. Coded support relative to the transparency ask; the quoted sentence criticises the government's preferred opt-out option.
“The idea of imposing civil and criminal liability on model developers when downstream users do something bad is so misguided and such a dangerous precedent. First off, the bill requires developers to prove that their models can’t possibly be used for any of the defined hazardous capabilities.”
“We believe that, in general, training generative AI constitutes fair use under current U.S. law. Using creative works to train generative AI fits with the long line of cases that has found that non-consumptive, technological uses of creative works in ways that are unrelated to the expressive content of those works are transformative fair uses”