philip lelyveld The world of entertainment technology

Artificial intelligence laws in the US states are feeling the weight of corporate lobbying

... So far, there is limited evidence that states are following the EU’s lead when drafting their own AI legislation. There is strong evidence of lobbying of state legislators by the tech industry, which does not seem keen on adopting the EU’s rules, instead pressing for less stringent legislation that minimizes compliance costs but which, ultimately, is less protective of individuals. Two enacted bills in Colorado and Utah and two draft bills in Oklahoma and Connecticut, among others, illustrate this. ...

A major difference between the state bills and the AI Act is their scope. The AI Act takes a sweeping approach aimed at protecting fundamental rights and establishes a risk-based system, where some uses of AI, such as the ‘social scoring’ of people based on factors such as their family ties or education, are prohibited. ...

In contrast, the state bills are narrower. The Colorado legislation directly drew on the Connecticut bill, and both include a risk-based framework, but of a more limited scope than the AI Act. ...

Another explanation is the hesitancy embodied by Governor Lamont. In the absence of unified federal laws, states fear that strong legislation would cause a local tech exodus to states with weaker regulations, a risk less pronounced in data-protection legislation. ...

For these reasons, lobbying groups claim to prefer national, unified AI regulation over state-by-state fragmentation, a line that has been parroted by big tech companies in public. But in private, some advocate for light-touch, voluntary rules all round, showing their dislike of both state and national AI legislation. ...

See the full story here: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02988-0