In the upcoming months, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on a lawsuit filed against Alphabet Inc.’s YouTube might shape the legal protection of rapidly developing technologies such as the artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot ChatGPT. The case investigates how the protection enshrined in the Communications Decency Act of 1996 – the law shielding technology platforms from legal responsibility for third-party content posted online – may apply to companies depending on algorithmic tools to target users with tailored recommendations. Though the case initially focuses on social media platforms, it has much broader implications, as the decision could potentially affect the legal immunization of AI generating systems such as ChatGPT, created by OpenAI, a company Microsoft Corp is a major investor in, or Bard from Alphabet’s Google.
ChatGPT, GPT-4 and Bard utilize a similar system of algorithms that suggests videos to YouTube users. Bridging the gap between these new technologies and the current legal debate, Justice Neil Gorsuch noted that AI tools that generating poetry and polemics would likely not benefit from this legal protection.
Senator Ron Wyden, a proponent of the 1996 law, spoke in favour of limiting the extent of Section 230 protections applied to generative AI tools as they create and disseminate original content. This content is thus not covered by the protection meant for third-party commentary. Experts and observers alike are anticipating a middle ground, wherein the context in which the AI-generated output is produced will be an essential benchmark to clear.
The OpenAI company remains undecided in the case, Google representatives stayed noncommittal, while the tech industry as a whole rallied to preserve the immunity provided by current law. They claim these AI-techs, who are much like regular search engines, do not manufacture these works, but put external information in a different light.
The consequences of the Supreme Court’s ruling over YouTube could therefore have great implications over the legal protection of rapidly-developing technologies and the people who design them. Companies must ensure their safety by developing safe products, otherwise, the consequences could be legally severe.
