In an ever-changing and developing artificial intelligence environment, The Ohio State University announces a trailblazing policy. All undergraduate students will need to be capable of harnessing and utilizing AI to graduate. Ohio State plans to accomplish fluency by implementing AI education and ethics into curricula throughout general education and major-specific courses. Students will leave Ohio State with an understanding of AI that will allow them to contribute creatively and lead effectively in an AI-driven economy.
To the dismay of many football fans, but to the joy of many consumers of pop culture, the highly publicized pairing of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce in late 2023 led to many National Football League (NFL) games covering Swift’s travels to Kansas City. While most football fans angered at Swift’s media coverage resorted to complaining on X (Twitter) or Facebook, some fans took their anger a step further and utilized artificial intelligence (AI) to create deepfake pornography, which was widely spread across various social media platforms. Prior to her relationship with Kelce, Kanye West created a nude wax model of Swift without her consent, and used this wax model in a music video which is still available to watch on YouTube.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the landscape of creativity and innovation, raising complex questions under U.S. intellectual property (IP) law. From generating digital artwork to contributing to inventive processes, AI systems increasingly participate in functions traditionally reserved for humans. Yet, recent judicial decisions and administrative guidance make clear that, under current law, only natural persons may qualify as authors or inventors. Central to this framework is the principle of meaningful human involvement, which forms a threshold for determining whether works or inventions incorporating AI are eligible for protection.
We are living in an AI data center boom. Big tech companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft are investing billions in building AI data center infrastructure to store and process data used to train AI models. A large language model (LLM), a category of AI foundation models, relies on immense amounts of data to learn and generate text outputs, as well as perform other tasks. IBM explains that to “ensure accuracy, this process involves training the LLM on a massive corpora of text (in the billions of pages)”. This elucidates why companies are eager to gather more data. Yet a question remains: where does the data used to train AI models come from, and to whom does it belong?
Billy Beane once said, “If he's a good hitter, why doesn't he hit good?” With the use of wearable technologies becoming ever prevalent in college sports, coaches can have an answer to this question and many more almost instantaneously. Wearable technology, such as Fitbits and Oura Rings, generate biometric data about an individual athlete, which can then be aggregated to derive insight on collegiate sports teams. The use of wearable technology can have a positive impact on a team’s success; however, the lack of regulation of the collection of college athletes’ biometric data poses serious privacy concerns for individual athletes.
As technology evolves, health care systems have adapted, integrating AI into their daily practices of medicine. AI has rapidly spread into hospitals and clinics around the world, as more than 1,000 health-related AI tools have been authorized by the FDA. In 2024, it was reported that nearly two-thirds of doctors are using AI in their health care practices. This represents a nearly 30% increase from 2023, in which only 38% of doctors were using AI. If this trend continues, nearly all doctors will have integrated AI into their practices in the next few years.
Imagine a twelve-year-old spending real money on virtual packs in FIFA, hoping for a rare player. They pay real money, press a button, and an animation spins before revealing what they have “won.” This situation mirrors a slot machine more than a simple video game. Yet, loot boxes are almost entirely unregulated in the United States.
Despite Big Tech’s recent claims, a federal judge in Florida ruled that an AI chatbot’s output is not entitled to First Amendment protection. The questions around artificial intelligence and First Amendment rights emerged as AI tools were used on social media platforms to exercise editorial discretion over online content. The First Amendment jurisprudence recognizes online platforms’ editorial discretion as a form of protected speech, even if this decision-making function employs AI.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has permeated into many facets of life, including healthcare, education, and the workplace. One of the newest is in therapy settings. Individuals seeking cost free care have used generic chatbots as a substitute for therapy.
The COVID-19 pandemic forced courts across the United States to rapidly adapt how justice is delivered. Virtual hearings, electronic filings, and hybrid proceedings became essential tools for maintaining court operations. While these innovations brought meaningful improvements in efficiency and flexibility, they also revealed persistent inequalities in access to technology and support. Many self-represented litigants, rural residents, and low-income individuals lack reliable internet or private spaces to participate, raising due process and equal protection concerns.
For centuries, whether they have used the services of mediums or spiritualists, people have attempted to reconnect with deceased loved ones. Now, with the help of digital afterlife businesses such as Seance AI, Replika, and HereAfter AI, people can feed data through AI to create chatbots that provide immersive interaction. Some of these chatbots are created proactively, in anticipation of a person’s death, while others are created after the death of a loved one using data that they left behind. The ability to create immersive interactions builds on older practices of preserving the memory of the deceased such as preserving letters, photographs, diaries, and other tangible personal belongings. Through AI, users can be immersed in interactions with lifelike avatars that are built on a range of personal data such as images, videos, and social media content.
As technology has advanced over time, law enforcement agencies and courts alike have adapted to integrate the new technologies into their practices. Currently, this is taking place with the integration of Artificial Intelligence into the criminal justice system. AI can be used to assist law enforcement in both making decisions and performing tasks, such as surveillance and investigation. With a continually growing distrust of law enforcement officers, the integration of AI can be an opportunity to improve the criminal justice system and remove some of the ever-present biases of law enforcement officers. However, with the many unknowns surrounding AI’s accuracy, it is of high importance that human judgment remains a factor throughout the investigative process and that the work of AI be validated.
While the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI) are widely discussed in the academic space, inventors hoping to protect their intellectual property face unique challenges. As an inventor brainstorms ideas, develops their potential invention, and even writes parts of their patent application, AI can be a very appealing resource. Additionally, AI tools may attract inventors looking to cut costs, helping them eliminate or reduce the need for retaining a patent attorney to assist them in dealing with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has permeated into many facets of individuals’ lives, including their workplace, interpersonal communications, and use of social media. In addition to these realms, AI has also impacted the criminal justice system, namely, sentencing procedures. Courtrooms have begun to utilize AI tools to promote safety and efficiency in sentencing.
As technology continues to evolve, so do threats. Gone are the days of Bonnie and Clyde style bank robberies; the much larger threat in modern times is the clandestine data pilfering by data brokers. We live in an era where our personal information is a commodity that can be purchased and then used against us. Despite the dangerous nature of data brokers, there is no comprehensive legislation protecting our personal data.
The right to repair has become one of the defining issues in today’s tech-law landscape. Broadly, it is the idea that consumers should have the ability to fix or modify the products they own, or at the very least, take their product to a third-party repair service of their choice. As consumer products grow more complex and software-dependent, many companies design them to be impossible for consumers to fix. Additionally, many products contain software that is protected by intellectual property rights. Thus, making any attempt to repair the software is illegal unless the repairman has authorization from the manufacturer themselves. This trend runs counter to a deeply rooted philosophy in American jurisprudence: that an owner has the right to use and enjoy their property as they see fit.
The gambling industry is a frequent target of cyberattacks, largely due to having inadequate safeguards for protecting consumer data. Sensitive information such as a gambler’s name, social security number, date of birth, address, banking details and security question answers are at risk of being disclosed in a data breach. If this data falls into the hands of hackers, it can lead to identity theft, financial fraud, and significant regulatory consequences for the sportsbook operators.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has vastly transformed the world of cybersecurity, and the impact has just begun. The number of threat actors using AI to carry out their cyberattacks has grown exponentially in recent years. Cyberattacks are no longer carried out through a series of trial and error, but rather AI-driven, high-precision attacks. AI-powered algorithms can identify vulnerabilities in systems, adapt to avoid detection, and target individuals or specific software. Generative AI in particular enables threat actors to impersonate their potential victims by drafting sophisticated and convincing phishing communications and emulating real voices. Not only are individual threat actors carrying out attacks on private companies, but there are reports that nations such as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are using AI to mount cyberattacks against the United States.
Robotic surgery has been an abundantly discussed and researched topic in the medical field, among both patients and providers, since its inception. The procedures are known for their reduced recovery times and increased patient satisfaction. Specifically, the robot assisted surgeries are celebrated by both patients and medical providers for their, “[e]fficiency, fewer incisions, less bleeding, and lower possibility of infections.”
However, even with these benefits to patient recovery and satisfaction, there are legal and ethical challenges to the use of robotic tools in surgery. Namely, there are concerns surrounding informed consent and potential liabilities. Just like many other medical procedures, patients who undergo robotic surgery must be made aware of the potential risks of the procedures, and how they differ from more traditional treatment plans.
Currently, the United States does not have a single, comprehensive privacy law. Instead, there are a number of sector-specific federal privacy laws. While these laws offer consumers some level of protection, they lack uniformity. The sectors with specific data privacy laws or regulations are financial services, healthcare, telecommunications, and education. Among the sector-specific laws, there are significant differences in protections offered, enforcement mechanisms, and consumer rights. Currently, these gaps are filled by Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, however, this is law is not specific to data privacy.
Copyright law is a sect of intellectual property law that focuses on protecting “original works of authorship as soon as an author fixes the work in a tangible form of expression.” The Copyright Act of 1976, Title 17 of the U.S. Code, includes in its protected subject matter pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works. These include both two and three dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art as well as photographs, technical drawings, and prints. As Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become more sophisticated, it has become able to generate works of art through algorithms that have learned from data inputs of previously created works. AI-generated art takes a variety of forms including digital images, paintings and even sculptures. The evolution of AI-generated art has formed a collaboration between humans and technology that has challenged the traditional notion of art and creativity as an entirely human endeavor.
How much should one be paying their attorney for patent litigation? Patent holders consistently face this question when they need to defend their patent against an infringer. Unfortunately for clients, the standard for how one should pay their attorney for such work depends on the firm. Some firms operate using a flat fee while others operate using the contingency fee method. Despite the split market, however, opinions vary on whether contingency fees are beneficial to either clients or attorneys.
Click here to view the archives.