Covers emerging laws and legal theories around whether and how artificial intelligence systems may hold rights or legal status, including personhood, autonomy, ownership of AI-created works, and liability for AI decisions. Also addresses governance frameworks, constitutional and human-rights implications, and disputes involving AI as a legal actor in courts and contracts.
Courts can exclude AI deepfakes under at least 5 core Federal Rules of Evidence—401/402, 403, 901, 702, and 802—when authenticity, reliability, or prejudice can’t be cured. As synthetic media gets easier to create, litigators must be ready to attack manipulated audio, video, images, and “AI transcripts” before they shape the factfinder’s view. This article explains […]
New York City Local Law 144 requires employers using automated employment decision tools (AEDTs) to conduct an annual “bias audit” and publish key audit details before using the tool on NYC applicants. In practice, many employers still deploy AI screening systems that can disadvantage protected groups or violate notice rules. This article explains how to […]
NYC Local Law 144 requires employers using automated employment decision tools (AEDTs) to complete an annual bias audit and provide candidate notice before use. For applicants and employees, that creates concrete hooks to challenge AI hiring systems that cause disparate impact—especially where audits, notices, or recordkeeping are deficient. This article explains how to evaluate an […]
Californians can challenge AI-generated evidence by attacking authentication, relevance, reliability, and prejudice under the California Evidence Code, and by invoking due process when the defense cannot meaningfully test the system. As AI outputs appear in criminal and civil cases—from deepfakes to automated “risk” scores—courts are being asked to decide what qualifies as trustworthy proof. This […]
Illinois residents can seek statutory damages of $1,000 per negligent violation and $5,000 per reckless/intentional violation under the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). In 2026, that leverage increasingly applies to AI systems trained on “biometric identifiers” or “biometric information,” including face geometry extracted from images and videos. This guide explains how to opt out, preserve […]
California consumers can demand AI companies stop using and delete unlawfully “shared” personal information—including photos—under the CPRA’s opt-out and deletion rights, enforced by the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) and the Attorney General. In Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and statewide, photographers and everyday users are discovering their images were scraped into AI training […]
In 2026, Hollywood actors secured the year’s biggest AI-rights legal win, setting a new baseline that studios can’t use or sell AI-generated replicas of performers without consent and pay terms. The ruling strengthened protections around voice, likeness, and digital “twin” exploitation in entertainment contracts. This article breaks down what the court decided, why it matters […]
