Tags
access to information
AI
AIDA
AI governance
AI regulation
Ambush Marketing
artificial intelligence
big data
bill c11
Bill c27
copyright
data governance
data protection
data scraping
data strategy
Electronic Commerce
freedom of expression
Geospatial
geospatial data
intellectual property
Internet
internet law
IP
open data
open government
personal information
pipeda
Privacy
trademarks
transparency
|
Displaying items by tag: AI regulation
Wednesday, 20 July 2022 11:54
Statutory MadLibs – Canada’s Artificial Intelligence and Data Act
As part of my series on Bill C-27, I will be writing about both the proposed amendments to Canada’s private sector data protection law and the part of the Bill that will create a new Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA). So far, I have been writing about privacy, and my posts on consent, de-identification, data-for-good, and the right of erasure are already available. Posts on AIDA, will follow, although I still have a bit more territory on privacy to cover first. However, in the meantime, as a teaser, perhaps you might be interested in playing a bit of statutory MadLibs…... Have you ever played MadLibs? It’s a paper-and-pencil game where someone asks the people in the room to supply a verb, noun, adverb, adjective, or body part, and the provided words are used to fill in the blanks in a story. The results are often absurd and sometimes hilarious. The federal government’s proposal in Bill C-27 for an Artificial Intelligence and Data Act, really lends itself to a game of statutory MadLibs. This is because some of the most important parts of the bill are effectively left blank – either the Minister or the Governor-in-Council is tasked in the Bill with filling out the details in regulations. Do you want to play? Grab a pencil, and here goes: Company X is developing an AI system that will (insert definition of ‘high impact system). It knows that this system is high impact because (insert how a company should assess impact). Company X has established measures to mitigate potential harms by (insert measures the company took to comply with the regulations) and has also recorded (insert records it kept), and published (insert information to be published). Company X also had its system audited by an auditor who is (insert qualifications). Company X is being careful, because if it doesn’t comply with (insert a section of the Act for which non-compliance will count as a violation), it could be found to have committed a (insert degree of severity) violation. This could lead to (insert type of proceeding). Company X, though, will be able to rely on (insert possible defence). However, if (insert possible defence) is unsuccessful, Company X may be liable to pay an Administrative Monetary Penalty if they are a (insert category of ‘person’) and if they have (insert factors to take into account). Ultimately, if they are unhappy with the outcome, they can launch a (insert a type of appeal proceeding). Because of this regulatory scheme, Canadians can feel (insert emotion) at how their rights and interests are protected.
Published in
Privacy
|
Electronic Commerce and Internet Law in Canada, 2nd EditionPublished in 2012 by CCH Canadian Ltd.
Intellectual Property for the 21st CenturyIntellectual Property Law for the 21st Century: Interdisciplinary Approaches
|