The Supreme Court has declined to review a lower court opinion that affirmed the US Copyright Office requirement of human authorship to be eligible for copyright protection.

The US District Court in New York held that a defendant’s written exchanges with a public AI platform were not protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine.

AI litigation is increasingly centered on a familiar area: product liability. Early cases are examining whether AI applications used by consumers are classified as products or services, and whether the alleged harms stem from design flaws, insufficient warnings, or predictable misuse. This change is supported by lawmakers, including the EU’s updated directive on liability for defective products (PLD), as well as a growing number of US state laws. All of these developments sug

As employer use of AI has increased, so has the development of AI regulation at the state and local level

Cyber insurance is a safety net, helping manage and mitigate the impact of cybersecurity incidents, including AI-driven ones.

The Copyright office has made a set of recommendations on whether materials generated by artificial intelligence should be protected.

Unpacking DOL's Best Practices for AI in Employment Decisions

New York City's AI Hiring Law. A Preview of the Future?

As more businesses seek to use artificial intelligence (AI) to generate content, it is vital to understand the scope of copyright...