Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The rise and notoriety of generative artificial intelligence technologies created a boom in artificial intelligence (AI) technologies of all kinds. Businesses raced to either roll out their own AI systems or find AI vendors to integrate the technology into their operations. While the law has struggled to keep pace, this boom has caught the attention of legislators and regulators. For example, substantive provisions of the European Union’s AI Act will come into force on Feb. 1, 2025, and the Colorado state legislature passed a landmark AI bill that comes into effect in February of 2026. Existing laws also implicate AI, such as in the privacy, intellectual property, and employment spaces.
As AI systems continue to proliferate all aspects of business, it’s time to think through the risks associated with the use of AI and who bears that risk in vendor agreements, joint ventures, and the like. In addition to increased regulatory attention, discoverable but unknown risks in using AI may expose a business to various avenues of liability, such as disruption in operations, data breaches, and decision-making outcomes that may lead to litigation. AI’s risk potential has been the discussion of endless debate, but one question remains: where do we go from here?
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.