AI governance

Explore comprehensive insights on the legal implications and frameworks surrounding artificial intelligence in our dedicated section on AI governance. Visitors will find in-depth articles, interviews with legal experts, and resources discussing regulatory challenges, compliance issues, and ethical considerations related to AI technology. Stay informed on how evolving laws impact the integration of AI in various sectors and the responsibilities of legal professionals in navigating this complex landscape.

How to Draft AI Vendor Contracts to Comply With the Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) in 2026

How to Draft AI Vendor Contracts to Comply With the Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) in 2026

Colorado’s AI Act (SB 24-205) becomes enforceable on February 1, 2026, and AI vendor contracts should be revised now to allocate “developer” and “deployer” duties, risk controls, and incident-response timelines. The statute targets “high-risk” AI systems used in consequential decisions (e.g., employment, housing, credit, education, insurance). This article provides practical contract clauses and a drafting […]

How to Draft AI Vendor Contracts to Comply With the Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) in 2026 Read More »

How to Comply With Colorado’s AI Act (SB24-205) for High-Risk AI in Hiring: Lawyer Checklist

How to Comply With Colorado’s AI Act (SB24-205) for High-Risk AI in Hiring: Lawyer Checklist

Colorado’s AI Act (SB24-205) requires deployers of “high-risk” AI used in hiring to implement a risk management program, conduct impact assessments, give notices, and allow appeals for adverse decisions. The law targets algorithmic discrimination and adds new compliance duties for employers and vendors using automated hiring tools. This article provides a lawyer-ready checklist focused on

How to Comply With Colorado’s AI Act (SB24-205) for High-Risk AI in Hiring: Lawyer Checklist Read More »

How to Draft a California AI Policy That Complies With the CPRA and Protects Trade Secrets

How to Draft a California AI Policy That Complies With the CPRA and Protects Trade Secrets

California businesses using AI must comply with the CPRA’s notice, purpose-limitation, and vendor-contract rules—especially when AI touches personal information and sensitive personal information. In practice, the highest risk comes from training, prompting, and sharing data with AI vendors in ways that expand “use” and “disclosure” beyond what was disclosed to consumers and employees. This article

How to Draft a California AI Policy That Complies With the CPRA and Protects Trade Secrets Read More »

How to Prepare for the EU AI Act in 2026: A Compliance Checklist for U.S. Law Firms Advising SaaS Vendors

How to Prepare for the EU AI Act in 2026: A Compliance Checklist for U.S. Law Firms Advising SaaS Vendors

The EU AI Act’s first compliance obligations begin applying in 2026 for many “high-risk” AI systems, with fines that can reach up to 7% of worldwide annual turnover. U.S. SaaS vendors selling into the EU (or whose customers deploy in the EU) can be pulled into the Act’s extraterritorial scope—driving immediate demand for practical, contract-ready

How to Prepare for the EU AI Act in 2026: A Compliance Checklist for U.S. Law Firms Advising SaaS Vendors Read More »

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts Under the EU AI Act for U.S. Companies Serving EU Customers

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts Under the EU AI Act for U.S. Companies Serving EU Customers

U.S. companies selling into the EU must align AI vendor contracts with the EU AI Act’s risk-based duties—especially for high-risk systems with mandatory compliance controls. The Act reaches many U.S. providers and deployers through its extraterritorial scope when AI outputs are used in the EU. This article explains how to draft enforceable AI vendor agreements

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts Under the EU AI Act for U.S. Companies Serving EU Customers Read More »

How to Comply with the EU AI Act for Client-Facing Legal Chatbots in Germany (2026 Checklist)

How to Comply with the EU AI Act for Client-Facing Legal Chatbots in Germany (2026 Checklist)

Germany-based law firms deploying client-facing chatbots must align with the EU AI Act’s risk controls, transparency rules, and (where applicable) high-risk obligations before full enforcement in 2026. Because these tools often handle sensitive client data and can influence legal decisions, German practices must coordinate AI Act compliance with GDPR and professional secrecy (BRAO). This article

How to Comply with the EU AI Act for Client-Facing Legal Chatbots in Germany (2026 Checklist) Read More »

How to Make AI-Generated Contract Clauses Enforceable Under California Law (2026)

How to Make AI-Generated Contract Clauses Enforceable Under California Law (2026)

AI-drafted contract clauses are enforceable in California when they satisfy the same core requirements as any term: mutual assent, lawful purpose, adequate definiteness, and no unconscionability. In 2026, the “AI” label rarely determines validity—the formation record and the clause’s substance do. This article explains a practical, litigation-ready workflow attorneys can use to make AI-generated clauses

How to Make AI-Generated Contract Clauses Enforceable Under California Law (2026) Read More »

How to Draft California-Compliant AI Vendor Contracts Under the CPRA and the 2025 AI Transparency Act

How to Draft California-Compliant AI Vendor Contracts Under the CPRA and the 2025 AI Transparency Act

California businesses should update AI vendor contracts now because the CPRA already governs “service providers” and “contractors,” and California’s 2025 AI transparency rules will add disclosure, documentation, and audit pressure. The risk is not theoretical: noncompliant data-sharing and opaque AI use can trigger consumer requests, regulator scrutiny, and downstream breach exposure. This article provides a

How to Draft California-Compliant AI Vendor Contracts Under the CPRA and the 2025 AI Transparency Act Read More »

How to Build an AI Governance Program for California Law Firms Under the CPRA, ABA Model Rules, and SOC 2 Requirements

How to Build an AI Governance Program for California Law Firms Under the CPRA, ABA Model Rules, and SOC 2 Requirements

California law firms can build a defensible AI governance program in 30–90 days by combining a written CPRA compliance layer, ABA ethics controls, and SOC 2-style security evidence. The CPRA raises stakes for vendor risk, sensitive personal information, and data minimization, while ABA Model Rules require competence, confidentiality, supervision, and candid communications. This article provides

How to Build an AI Governance Program for California Law Firms Under the CPRA, ABA Model Rules, and SOC 2 Requirements Read More »

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts for SMBs: Data Ownership, IP Indemnity, and Audit Rights Explained

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts for SMBs: Data Ownership, IP Indemnity, and Audit Rights Explained

Most SMB AI vendor contracts fail on three enforceability points: clear data ownership, robust IP indemnity, and usable audit rights. As generative AI tools move from experimentation to core operations, vague “standard terms” can leave small businesses exposed. This article explains the contract clauses attorneys should draft (and negotiate) to protect SMB clients and reduce

How to Draft Enforceable AI Vendor Contracts for SMBs: Data Ownership, IP Indemnity, and Audit Rights Explained Read More »

Scroll to Top