Science and Technology Law Commons^™

Session 2: The Cases For Industry Self-Regulation And Government Regulation Of Ai, Boaz Ashkenazy, Kevin Bartholomew, Kevin De Liban, Christopher Yoo

SITIE Symposiums

In Session Two of the SITIE 2025 Symposium titled “The Cases for Industry Self-Regulation and Government Regulation of AI,” moderated by Seattle University Technology Ethics Initiative Director and Professor Onur Bakiner, the panelists discuss their perspectives and experiences with AI regulation. They share observations about the industry and delve into the topics of AI complexity, concerns around accountability, the shift to agentic AI, the current state of AI regulation, existing legal guardrails, and their outlook on AI regulation.

8th Annual Innovation And Technology Law Conference: Regulating Artificial Intelligence: From Where And When?, Steven Bender

SITIE Symposiums

Since 2018, the Seattle University School of Law has presented an annual late spring/summer conference on innovation and technology, shifting to a virtual conference in 2020. The virtual format fosters inclusion of national and even international speakers (as this year with Marie-Charlotte Roques-Bonnet, Data Protection/AI Consultant & Research Lead, ID side.eu, joining from France), and participation from a broad base audience, which this year included over 200 registrants who joined live or watched the recording.

How Domestic Institutions Shape The Global Tech War, Anu Bradford, Eileen Li, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

The United States (U.S.), China, and the European Union (EU) are engaged in a national security-driven economic competition over advanced technology. Many scholars and commentators focus on the external dimension of this geopolitical contest; that is, they describe the strategic choices by each actor in terms of geopolitical realities, threat perceptions, and relative power. However, this Article brings to the fore the internal dimension of the global tech war. We argue that each player’s strategy in the tech war is a function of its internal features, including basic constitutional powers, domestic legal institutions, and the relationships between the government and …

Foreword, Mark D. Janis, Jennifer D. Oliva, Alivia D. Benedict

Indiana Law Journal

In this issue we are delighted to present papers from the symposium “Law and Technology at the Crossroads: A Centennial Summit,” held in Bloomington in November 2024. The symposium originated from the collaborative efforts of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law’s law and technology faculty and the Indiana Law Journal’s editorial board, notably 2023–2024 Editor-in-Chief John Vastag and 2024–2025 Executive Articles & Symposium Editor Paige Wynkoop. The Maurer School of Law’s Center for Intellectual Property Research provided funding, as did Indiana University through its Research Conference Grant Program. Indiana University’s Ostrom Workshop and the Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, …

Multiplicity As An Ai Governance Principle, Michal Shur-Ofry

Indiana Law Journal

As AI becomes increasingly embedded in our daily lives, this Article explores one of its critical, yet overlooked, societal implications: the propensity of large language models (LLMs) to generate mainstream, standardized content, potentially narrowing their users’ worldviews.

Taking a close look at the technological underpinnings of LLMs, the analysis suggests that—due to the combination of human judgments, training datasets, and inherent features of the underlying technological paradigm—LLMs’ outputs are likely to be geared toward the popular and to project to their users concentrated, mainstream worldviews, sidelining a broader spectrum of perspectives. This Article explores the asymmetrical power relations between LLMs …

Unpacking Open Source Bio, Jorge L. Contreras

Indiana Law Journal

For at least a quarter of a century, life science researchers around the world have undertaken initiatives loosely based on principles, goals, and institutional structures derived from the open source software (OSS) movement—approaches that I term “open source bio.” Yet open source bio lacks a clear definition and set of guiding principles. Given public calls for greater openness in life science research, it is useful to understand how open source bio projects have fared over the past quarter century: how they were structured, what they hoped to achieve, and, as social and policy experiments, whether or not they were successful. …

Discord And The Pentagon's Watchdog: Countering Extremism In The U.S. Military, Amy Gaudion

Indiana Law Journal

In his 2022 book, Ward Farnsworth crafts a metaphor from the lead-pipe theory for the fall of Rome to consider how rage and misinformation traveling through today’s technology-enabled pipes are poisoning our civic engagement and threatening our governmental structures: “We have built networks for the delivery of information––the internet, and especially social media. These networks too, are a marvel. But they also carry a kind of poison with them. The mind fed from those sources learns to subsist happily on quick reactions, easy certainties, one-liners, and rage.”1 This Article carries the metaphor into a new context and considers what should …

On Software Bugs And Legal Bugs: Product Liability In The Age Of Code, Asaf Lubin

Indiana Law Journal

Despite software’s ubiquity in modern life, its classification within product liability law remains unsettled. Is software a product, a service, a good, a component, a medium, a force, or something else altogether? Under the Restatement (Third) of Torts, a product is defined as a “tangible personal property distributed commercially for use or consumption.” But has this definition been embraced by states? And how has it been applied in the courts, since its adoption some twenty-six years ago?

Through a fifty-state survey and the canvassing of all relevant case law, this Essay reveals widespread doctrinal inconsistencies within the common law. Some …

Defragging Ownership: How Corporations Sliced, Diced, And Sold The Bundle, Joao Marinotti

Indiana Law Journal

Personal property ownership is in a precarious state, facing structural, economic, and legal assaults. As a result, the autonomy, security, and privacy that ownership once protected have been displaced by a tenuous reliance on opaque contractual arrangements and corporate goodwill. Owners no longer enjoy the unfettered right to access, use, and control their personal property. Through a range of seemingly unrelated business practices, companies have leveraged their growing power to disaggregate the property bundle into compartmentalized rights and privileges, which can then be individually licensed, leased, restricted, or even revoked. Purchases no longer mark the end of buyer-seller relationships; instead, …

Unlocking Platform Data For Research, Niva Elkin-Koren, Maayan Perel, Ohad Somech

Indiana Law Journal

Digital platforms, which control unique access points to the rich data stored on their servers, have become a “living lab” of real-time information. Scientists and researchers increasingly use platform data for various purposes, such as training machine learning (ML) systems and Natural Language Processing (NLP) models, and for studying diverse fields such as medicine, humanities, and social sciences, including the influence of digital platforms on society. However, researchers increasingly encounter significant barriers when attempting to access platform data. Although platforms typically lack proprietary rights over the data itself, they exert strong control over its use by imposing digital locks and …

Moving Slow And Fixing Things, Scott Shackelford, Janine Hiller, Christos Makridis, Iain Nash, Kathryn Kisska-Schulze, Hannibal Travis

Indiana Law Journal

Silicon Valley, and the U.S. tech sector more broadly, have changed the world in part by embracing a “move fast and break things” mentality popularized by Mark Zuckerberg. While it is true that the tech sector has attempted to break with such a reactive and flippant response to security concerns, including at Microsoft itself through its Security Development Lifecycle, cyberattacks continue at an alarming rate. As a result, there are growing calls from regulators around the world to change the risk equation. An example is the 2023 U.S. National Cybersecurity Strategy, which argues that “[w]e must hold the stewards of …

Dark Patterns As Disloyal Design, Johanna Gunawan, Woodrow Hartzog, Neil Richards, David Choffnes, Christo Wilson

Indiana Law Journal

Lawmakers have started to regulate “dark patterns,” understood to be design practices meant to influence technology users’ decisions through manipulative or deceptive means. Most agree that dark patterns are undesirable, but open questions remain as to which design choices should be subjected to scrutiny, much less the best way to regulate them.

In this Article, we propose adapting the concept of dark patterns to better fit legal frameworks. Critics allege that the legal conceptualizations of dark patterns are overbroad, impractical, and counterproductive. We argue that law and policy conceptualizations of dark patterns suffer from three deficiencies: First, dark patterns lack …

Design Patent Law's Three Little Words, Mark D. Janis

Indiana Law Journal

U.S. design patent law protects the visual characteristics of articles of manufacture. For many years, major manufacturers of athletic footwear have protected their visually iconic designs with design patents, fueling a global market valued at nearly $100 billion. Today, however, shoe design has arrived in the digital universe. Digital sneakers such as Gucci’s Virtual 25 and Nike’s “Our Force Ones” can be “worn” only in virtual worlds but have substantial real world economic value. Yet U.S. design patent law makes it difficult—some would say impossible—to protect those designs, on the ground that they do not satisfy the statutory requirement for …

Can Ai, As Such, Invade Your Privacy? An Experimental Study Of The Social Element Of Surveillance, Aileen Nielsen

Indiana Law Journal

The increasing use of AI rather than human surveillance puts pressure on two long-used cultural and (sometimes) legal distinctions: as between human and machine observers and as between content and metadata. Machines do more and more watching through advancing technology, rendering AI a plausible replacement for humans in surveillance tasks. Further, machines can commit to surveil only certain forms of information in a way that humans cannot, rendering the distinction between content and metadata increasingly relevant too for crafting privacy law and policy. Yet despite the increasing importance of these distinctions, their legal importance remains in four key domains of …

Ninth Amendment Neurorights, Joseph A. Tomain

Indiana Law Journal

Neurotechnology developments threaten two fundamental human rights: freedom of thought and mental privacy. For example, neuroscientists use brain scans to decode unspoken thoughts and to predict political ideology and sexual orientation. Additionally, they have successfully implanted false memories in the minds of mice. There are undoubtedly beneficial uses of this dual-use technology, such as identifying and treating a variety of medical conditions. But left unchecked, neurotechnology will be exploited by public and private actors alike. There is a growing and contested literature about how the law should respond to the increasing risks of neurotechnology. This Essay contributes to that literature …

The Mirage Of Artificial Intelligence Terms Of Use Restrictions, Peter Henderson, Mark A. Lemley

Indiana Law Journal

Artificial intelligence (AI) model creators commonly attach restrictive terms of use to both their models and their outputs. These terms typically prohibit activities ranging from creating competing AI models to spreading disinformation. Often taken at face value, these terms are positioned by companies as key enforceable tools for preventing misuse, particularly in policy dialogs. The California AI Transparency Act even codifies this approach, mandating certain responsible use terms to accompany models.

But are these terms truly meaningful, or merely a mirage? There are myriad examples where these broad terms are regularly and repeatedly violated. Yet except for some account suspensions …

The Overstated Cost Of Ai Fairness In Criminal Justice, Ignacio Cofone, Warut Khern-Am-Nuai

Indiana Law Journal

The dominant critique of algorithmic fairness in AI decision-making, particularly in criminal justice, is that increasing fairness reduces the accuracy of predictions, thereby imposing a cost on society. This Article challenges that assumption by empirically analyzing the COMPAS algorithm, a widely used and widely discussed risk assessment tool in the U.S. criminal justice system.

This Article makes two contributions. First, it demonstrates that widely used AI models do more than replicate existing biases—they exacerbate them. Using causal inference methods, we show that racial bias is not only present in the COMPAS dataset but also worsened by AI models such as …

Regulating Healthcare Coverage Algorithms, Jennifer D. Oliva

Indiana Law Journal

American healthcare facilities and providers increasingly rely on algorithmic tools to support clinical decision-making, standards of care, and institutional practices related to patient diagnosis and treatment. This development has been characterized as both “promising” and “peril[ous].” Healthcare algorithms are intended to improve and standardize healthcare decision-making, but they also are capable of exacerbating bias and discrimination and, thus, contributing to the delivery of inequitable care for already disadvantaged groups.

The Impact Of Artificial Intelligence On Access To Justice: Predictive Analytics And The Legal Services Market, Matthew Dylag

Dalhousie Law Journal

This paper examines how developers of predictive analytics—a technology using artificial intelligence (AI) to predict the outcomes of legal disputes—position their product vis-à-vis access to justice. In particular, it examines how two companies market their software to better understand how this technology is being integrated into the legal services market and to comment on the software’s potential impact on access to justice. The first part of this paper reviews the access to justice landscape and examines existing critiques of AI supported technology from an access to justice perspective. The second part briefly outlines the scope and design of the study, …

Whose Bot Is It Anyway? Determining Liability For Ai-Generated Content, John G. Browning

Northern Illinois University Law Review

As Chief Justice John Roberts noted in his State of the Judiciary address in late December 2023, artificial intelligence has not only had a seismic effect on society and the legal profession, but it is also presenting courts with novel questions to resolve. To date, most of the legal scholarship discussing generative AI has focused on areas like the ethical dimensions of its use, copyright infringement implications, AI governance issues, and the evidentiary questions raised by the use of this technology. However, a void in the scholarship exists with respect to the question of who should be liable for AI-generated …