For years, companies have treated anonymization as a legal comfort zone. Remove names, emails, phone numbers, and other identifiers, and the remaining dataset was often viewed as safer to share, analyze, monetize, and retain. That assumption is getting harder to defend. Artificial intelligence (AI) has changed the practical re-identification analysis by making it easier to

AI giant Anthropic has suggested that the world temporarily “pause” on AI development because of AI tools’ ability for “‘recursive self-improvement’– that is, being able to make better and more powerful versions of itself. Recursive self-improvement is a bugbear of AI safety researchers, viewed as the key step for AI to become superintelligent and therefore

On May 27, 2026, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont signed Senate Bill 5 (“the Bill”) into law, creating a broad framework for artificial intelligence oversight in the state. The Bill reaches beyond any single category of AI use and touches consumer disclosures, employment tools, AI companions, synthetic media, workforce issues, state agency AI use, and privacy-related

Colorado has now significantly revised its AI governance framework before the law ever takes effect. SB 26-189, approved by Governor Jared Polis on May 14, 2026, repeals and reenacts key portions of the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act (CAIA) and reframes the law around “automated decision-making technology” (ADMT) used to materially influence consequential decisions in areas such

Many insurers, and the businesses they cover, are still treating artificial intelligence (AI) risk as if it were cyber risk cloaked in a costume. That instinct is understandable since AI systems process data, rely on vendors, create operational dependencies, and sit inside digital infrastructures. However, early litigation is showing why that framing is likely incomplete.

Pennsylvania’s lawsuit against Character Technologies, Inc., is a notable early test of how professional licensing laws may apply to consumer-facing AI chatbots. The Commonwealth, acting through the Department of State and State Board of Medicine, filed a Petition for Review in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania seeking to restrain what it alleges is the unlawful

Multiple class action cases have been filed against Tempus AI  alleging that, during its acquisition of Ambry Genetics, the company improperly collected and disclosed genetic information without obtaining prior written consent from individuals during its acquisition of Ambry. Tempus acquired Ambry, a genetic testing firm, in February 2025 for $600 million. The acquisition included the