Reiteration is probably necessary.
A Letter to the Privacy Law Community from the Scholars and Teachers in Leadership
May 2, 2025
Dear Colleagues,
In our capacities as scholars, teachers, and leaders of the Privacy Law Scholars Foundation (PLSF) and the Privacy Law Scholars Conference (PLSC), we write to express our grave concern about ongoing threats to privacy and democracy in the United States.
Each of us brings different perspectives on what the law is and should be. Diversity in our views is one hallmark of the privacy law community. That diversity has made PLSC a vibrant incubator of cutting edge scholarship for nearly twenty years. Although we have different views on many things, we are resolute in our view that lawyers, elected officials, judges, and other government actors must abide by the rule of law. And although we approach the topic of privacy from many different angles, we all agree that privacy is of great and fundamental importance to the rule of law and to democracy in general.
Why is this necessary? Wouldn’t AI be covered under existing rules?
US judicial panel advances proposal to regulate AI-generated evidence
A federal judicial panel advanced a proposal on Friday to regulate the introduction of artificial intelligence-generated evidence at trial, with judges expressing a need to swiftly get feedback from the public and lawyers on the draft rule to get ahead of a rapidly evolving technology.
The U.S. Judicial Conference's Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules in Washington, D.C., voted 8-1 in favor of seeking public comment on a draft rule designed to ensure evidence produced by generative AI technology meets the same reliability standards as evidence from a human expert witness.
No comments:
Post a Comment