On October 4, 2022, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth published a white paper outlining 10 key recommendations for regulating artificial intelligence (“AI”) in Brazil (the "White Paper"). CIPL prepared the White Paper to assist the special committee of legal experts established by Federal Senate of Brazil (the “Senate Committee”) as it works towards an AI framework in Brazil.
CIPL recommends adopting a layered framework for AI that (1) enables an agile, technology-agnostic and future-proof regime that builds on existing legal standards and frameworks; (2) is risk-based and grounded on the holistic impact assessment of AI applications; (3) fosters innovation through organizational accountability; and (4) enables consistent and modern approaches to regulatory oversight.
To position Brazil as a competitive and responsible leader in AI innovation, Brazil’s AI framework should:
- Be designed in a way that enables it to evolve and be flexible to changes in the AI ecosystem. Brazil can achieve a technology-agnostic and future-proof regime by regulating only key AI issues and risks and enabling responsible AI through a range of accountability tools.
- Build on existing legal frameworks and avoid duplication of, and conflict with, existing requirements. Certain aspects of AI are already regulated by Brazil’s data protection law (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados (“LGPD”)), the Civil Framework for the Internet, the Consumer Protection Code and the Access to Information Law.
- Adopt a principles and outcomes-based regulatory approach that enables organizational accountability. Accountability requirements facilitate responsible AI innovation, trust in the AI ecosystem and the responsible collection and use of data for AI training, development and deployment.
- Incorporate a risk-based approach. The focus of such an approach assesses the risk, benefits and reticence risk of AI applications and enables the range of AI innovations while ensuring the responsible development and deployment of AI.
- Incentivize the development and implementation of accountable AI practices. Organizations should be incentivized to adopt practices that enable their AI innovations in a responsible way while also ensuring compliance with any AI regime and appropriate protections for individuals.
- Be enforced by existing regulators in a collaborative way. Oversight and enforcement of Brazil’s AI framework should be performed by existing regulators, including Brazil’s National Data Protection Authority (Agência Nacional de Proteção de Dados (“ANPD”)), and such regulators should work together through a regulatory forum to ensure consistent interpretation of AI rules.
- Integrate co-regulatory mechanisms to enable responsible AI innovation. AI assurance frameworks, certifications, codes of conduct and standards can serve as important mechanisms to enable organizational accountability and appropriate regulatory oversight.
- Encourage new and agile approaches to regulatory oversight. Constructive engagement with industry and government bodies as well as modern and agile oversight tools, such as regulatory sandboxes, policy prototyping projects and data review boards should all form part of Brazil’s AI regulatory toolbox.
- Address issues of liability in the longer term. In the immediate term, there should be a concerted effort to monitor market developments and for regulators to work with legal experts, practitioners and representatives of AI developers, suppliers and users to engage in thoughtful discussions on liability in the AI context before settling on any particular legal position.
- Be formulated through a multi-stakeholder process. Creating a successful AI framework in Brazil will require consideration of a wide variety of stakeholder perspectives. Such a process has proven successful in the development of other legal frameworks in Brazil, including the LGPD and the Civil Framework for the Internet.
For more information about the above recommendations, read the White Paper.
Search
Recent Posts
- Website Use of Third-Party Tracking Software Not Prohibited Under Massachusetts Wiretap Act
- HHS Announces Additional Settlements Following Ransomware Attacks Including First Enforcement Under Risk Analysis Initiative
- Employee Monitoring: Increased Use Draws Increased Scrutiny from Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Categories
- Behavioral Advertising
- Centre for Information Policy Leadership
- Children’s Privacy
- Cyber Insurance
- Cybersecurity
- Enforcement
- European Union
- Events
- FCRA
- Financial Privacy
- General
- Health Privacy
- Identity Theft
- Information Security
- International
- Marketing
- Multimedia Resources
- Online Privacy
- Security Breach
- U.S. Federal Law
- U.S. State Law
- Workplace Privacy
Tags
- Aaron Simpson
- Accountability
- Adequacy
- Advertisement
- Advertising
- American Privacy Rights Act
- Anna Pateraki
- Anonymization
- Anti-terrorism
- APEC
- Apple Inc.
- Argentina
- Arkansas
- Article 29 Working Party
- Artificial Intelligence
- Australia
- Austria
- Automated Decisionmaking
- Baltimore
- Bankruptcy
- Belgium
- Biden Administration
- Big Data
- Binding Corporate Rules
- Biometric Data
- Blockchain
- Bojana Bellamy
- Brazil
- Brexit
- British Columbia
- Brittany Bacon
- Brussels
- Business Associate Agreement
- BYOD
- California
- CAN-SPAM
- Canada
- Cayman Islands
- CCPA
- CCTV
- Chile
- China
- Chinese Taipei
- Christopher Graham
- CIPA
- Class Action
- Clinical Trial
- Cloud
- Cloud Computing
- CNIL
- Colombia
- Colorado
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Compliance
- Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Congress
- Connecticut
- Consent
- Consent Order
- Consumer Protection
- Cookies
- COPPA
- Coronavirus/COVID-19
- Council of Europe
- Council of the European Union
- Court of Justice of the European Union
- CPPA
- CPRA
- Credit Monitoring
- Credit Report
- Criminal Law
- Critical Infrastructure
- Croatia
- Cross-Border Data Flow
- Cyber Attack
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- Data Brokers
- Data Controller
- Data Localization
- Data Privacy Framework
- Data Processor
- Data Protection Act
- Data Protection Authority
- Data Protection Impact Assessment
- Data Transfer
- David Dumont
- David Vladeck
- Delaware
- Denmark
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Justice
- Department of the Treasury
- District of Columbia
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- Dobbs
- Dodd-Frank Act
- DPIA
- E-Privacy
- E-Privacy Directive
- Ecuador
- Ed Tech
- Edith Ramirez
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act
- Electronic Privacy Information Center
- Elizabeth Denham
- Employee Monitoring
- Encryption
- ENISA
- EU Data Protection Directive
- EU Member States
- European Commission
- European Data Protection Board
- European Data Protection Supervisor
- European Parliament
- Facial Recognition Technology
- FACTA
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Federal Communications Commission
- Federal Data Protection Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- FERC
- FinTech
- Florida
- Food and Drug Administration
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
- France
- Franchise
- Fred Cate
- Freedom of Information Act
- Freedom of Speech
- Fundamental Rights
- GDPR
- Geofencing
- Geolocation
- Georgia
- Germany
- Global Privacy Assembly
- Global Privacy Enforcement Network
- Gramm Leach Bliley Act
- Hacker
- Hawaii
- Health Data
- Health Information
- HIPAA
- HIPPA
- HITECH Act
- Hong Kong
- House of Representatives
- Hungary
- Illinois
- India
- Indiana
- Indonesia
- Information Commissioners Office
- Information Sharing
- Insurance Provider
- Internal Revenue Service
- International Association of Privacy Professionals
- International Commissioners Office
- Internet
- Internet of Things
- IP Address
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Jacob Kohnstamm
- Japan
- Jason Beach
- Jay Rockefeller
- Jenna Rode
- Jennifer Stoddart
- Jersey
- Jessica Rich
- John Delionado
- John Edwards
- Kentucky
- Korea
- Latin America
- Laura Leonard
- Law Enforcement
- Lawrence Strickling
- Legislation
- Liability
- Lisa Sotto
- Litigation
- Location-Based Services
- London
- Madrid Resolution
- Maine
- Malaysia
- Markus Heyder
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Meta
- Mexico
- Microsoft
- Minnesota
- Mobile App
- Mobile Device
- Montana
- Morocco
- MySpace
- Natascha Gerlach
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Science and Technology Council
- National Security
- National Security Agency
- National Telecommunications and Information Administration
- Nebraska
- NEDPA
- Netherlands
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New Zealand
- Nigeria
- Ninth Circuit
- North Carolina
- Norway
- Obama Administration
- OECD
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Foreign Assets Control
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Opt-In Consent
- Oregon
- Outsourcing
- Pakistan
- Parental Consent
- Payment Card
- PCI DSS
- Penalty
- Pennsylvania
- Personal Data
- Personal Health Information
- Personal Information
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Peru
- Philippines
- Phyllis Marcus
- Poland
- PRISM
- Privacy By Design
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Rights
- Privacy Rule
- Privacy Shield
- Protected Health Information
- Ransomware
- Record Retention
- Red Flags Rule
- Regulation
- Rhode Island
- Richard Thomas
- Right to Be Forgotten
- Right to Privacy
- Risk-Based Approach
- Rosemary Jay
- Russia
- Safe Harbor
- Sanctions
- Schrems
- Scott Kimpel
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Security Rule
- Senate
- Serbia
- Service Provider
- Singapore
- Smart Grid
- Smart Metering
- Social Media
- Social Security Number
- South Africa
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- South Korea
- Spain
- Spyware
- Standard Contractual Clauses
- State Attorneys General
- Steven Haas
- Stick With Security Series
- Stored Communications Act
- Student Data
- Supreme Court
- Surveillance
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Targeted Advertising
- Telecommunications
- Telemarketing
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- Tennessee
- Terry McAuliffe
- Texas
- Text Message
- Thailand
- Transparency
- Transportation Security Administration
- Trump Administration
- United Arab Emirates
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Unmanned Aircraft Systems
- Uruguay
- Utah
- Vermont
- Video Privacy Protection Act
- Video Surveillance
- Virginia
- Viviane Reding
- Washington
- Whistleblowing
- Wireless Network
- Wiretap
- ZIP Code