Regulation of generative artificial intelligence in foreign jurisdictions and Russia: a comparative legal analysis

This article examines the experience of Russia, the CIS, China and the EU in regulating the use of generative AI. This study covers a practical block of issues in terms of mandatory requirements for generative AI service providers, the main forms of liability for violating national and supranational legislation. In addition, the difference in the definition of generative AI and the main block of doctrinal studies in the presented jurisdictions are examined. Based on the conducted study, proposals are formulated for the subsequent improvement of domestic regulation of the use of generative AI models. The subject of the study is public relations with the use of generative AI models in the private and public legal field. The object of the study is regulatory documents, recommendations and other documents regulating the use of generative AI models in the EU, China, Russia and the CIS model law, academic publications on the issue under study, as well as individual examples of judicial practice. The research methodology includes a set of philosophical, general scientific, special scientific methods of cognition, including dialectical, systemic, structural-functional, hermeneutic, comparative-legal, formal-legal (dogmatic), etc. Within the framework of the presented study, as indicated in the title of the article, special emphasis is placed on conducting a comparative-legal study of the regulation of the use of generative AI models. Within the framework of the presented study, the regulatory framework of the studied countries and supranational associations in the context of regulating generative AI is deeply (by article) analyzed. Distinctive features of regulation are determined both at the level of definitions and at the level of requirements for generative AI service providers. In the identified differences in the regulation of the use of generative AI, potential proposals for the implementation of a number of foreign regulatory approaches for Russia are formulated, taking into account the specifics of the formation of domestic regulation of generative AI models. The proposals presented as a result of the conducted research may be reflected in the legislative and law enforcement practice of the relevant authorities exercising control and supervision over the activities of generative artificial intelligence service providers in Russia, and will also be of interest to practicing lawyers involved in supporting projects using generative AI.

artificial intelligence, generative AI, safe AI, AI regulation, information law, comparative AI study, administrative law, ChatGPT, EU AI Act, PRC and AI