The author critically examines the provisions of the EU regulation proposal COM(2021) 206 final on artificial intelligence (so-called Artificial Intelligence Act: AIA) relevant to the prohibition on certain so-called ‘artificial intelligence practices’ and to the so-called ‘transparency obligation’, as contained in article 5 and 52 of AIA, respectively. The first criticism regards the very expression ‘artificial intelligence practices’, which the author argues to be incorrect in terms of legal language as well as misleading. The second criticism regards the perimeter of the activities that are effectively prohibited under article 5 AIA. In this respect, the author remarks that, under the current wording of the proposed regulation, it would not prohibited - inter alia - to design and manufacture within the EU’s territory and to export outside the EU’s territory those very AI systems that are under the prohibitions of article 5 AIA (i.e. the prohibition on placing on the market, putting into service and/or use in the Union’s market certain AI systems). The third criticism regards the lack of specific consideration in the AIA of the neuromarketing AI systems. The fourth criticism consists in an alleged lack of coordination between the AIA proposal, on one side, and the Digital Services Act, the proposal for a regulation relevant to transparency and targeting of political advertising (of 25 November 2021), as well as with the recent proposal of AI Liability Directive (of 28 September 2022), on the other side.
L’a. esamina criticamente le norme sul divieto delle c.d. ‘pratiche di intelligenza artificiale’ e sul c.d. ‘obbligo di trasparenza’ contenute, rispettivamente, negli artt. 5 e 52 della proposta di regolamento europeo COM(2021) 206 final noto sotto il nome di Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA). La prima critica riguarda la stessa espressione ‘pratiche di intelligenza artificiale’, che l’a. ritiene essere tecnicamente errata e fuorviante. La seconda critica riguarda il perimetro delle attività effettivamente vietate dall’art. 5 della proposta di regolamento, dove in particolare l’a. osserva che l’AIA, nell’attuale testo, consente inter alia di progettare e produrre nel territorio dell’UE, e di esportare fuori dall’UE sistemi di intelligenza artificiale la cui immissione, messa in servizio ed uso nel mercato dell’Unione sono invece vietati ai sensi della medesima proposta di regolamento. La terza critica riguarda la mancata specifica considerazione da parte dell’AIA dei sistemi di intelligenza artificiale di neuromarketing. La quarta critica consiste in un difetto di coordinamento che l’a. rinviene tra la proposta di AIA con il divieto di trattamento di dati sensibili a fini di marketing previsto sia dal Digital Services Act che dalla proposta di regolamento relativo alla trasparenza e al targeting della pubblicità politica (del 25 novembre 2021) e con la recentissima proposta di AI Liability Directive (del 28 settembre 2022).
Regole di immissione sul mercato e «pratiche di intelligenza artificiale» vietate nella proposta di Artificial Intelligence Act / Orlando, Salvatore. - In: PERSONA E MERCATO. - ISSN 2239-8570. - 3(2022), pp. 346-367.
Regole di immissione sul mercato e «pratiche di intelligenza artificiale» vietate nella proposta di Artificial Intelligence Act
Salvatore Orlando
2022
Abstract
The author critically examines the provisions of the EU regulation proposal COM(2021) 206 final on artificial intelligence (so-called Artificial Intelligence Act: AIA) relevant to the prohibition on certain so-called ‘artificial intelligence practices’ and to the so-called ‘transparency obligation’, as contained in article 5 and 52 of AIA, respectively. The first criticism regards the very expression ‘artificial intelligence practices’, which the author argues to be incorrect in terms of legal language as well as misleading. The second criticism regards the perimeter of the activities that are effectively prohibited under article 5 AIA. In this respect, the author remarks that, under the current wording of the proposed regulation, it would not prohibited - inter alia - to design and manufacture within the EU’s territory and to export outside the EU’s territory those very AI systems that are under the prohibitions of article 5 AIA (i.e. the prohibition on placing on the market, putting into service and/or use in the Union’s market certain AI systems). The third criticism regards the lack of specific consideration in the AIA of the neuromarketing AI systems. The fourth criticism consists in an alleged lack of coordination between the AIA proposal, on one side, and the Digital Services Act, the proposal for a regulation relevant to transparency and targeting of political advertising (of 25 November 2021), as well as with the recent proposal of AI Liability Directive (of 28 September 2022), on the other side.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Orlando_Regole_2022.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Altra licenza (allegare)
Dimensione
927.75 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
927.75 kB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.