Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies...<p>Foundation models are labelled as &#x27;high risk&#x27;!<p>In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well...<p>&gt; While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative systems.<p>&gt;Any model made available in the EU, without first passing extensive, and expensive, licensing, would subject companies to massive fines of the greater of €20,000,000 or 4% of worldwide revenue. Opensource developers, and hosting services such as GitHub – as importers – would be liable for making unlicensed models available.<p>&gt;Open Source LLMs Not Exempt: Open source foundational models are not exempt from the act. The programmers and distributors of the software have legal liability. For other forms of open source AI software, liability shifts to the group employing the software or bringing it to market. (pg 70).<p>Source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;technomancers.ai&#x2F;eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-software&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;technomancers.ai&#x2F;eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-...</a><p>While i&#x27;m usually pro-EU they are really overreacting here and the consequences for our economy of crippling a technology with so much potential will be enormous in the long run.

Tracking &quot;Energy&quot; for what is otherwise a compressed version of the entire internet at your disposal seems so green-washed and disingenuous. Whatever &quot;Energy&quot; consumption those models have - it&#x27;s peanuts compared to the alternatives.

This is as if the EU required Coca Cola to print the recipe on the bottle. They would just stop selling original Coke in the EU rather than disclose that.<p>What is more likely is that OpenAI, Google etc will train EU-specific models for the EU market.

Is there a term for a country where ...<p><pre><code> - there are so many laws and regulations, that everybody is violating some of them - therefore only a tiny fraction can be brought to court - therefore everybody lives in the constant fear that they suddenly arbitrarily get crushed ?</code></pre>

&gt; The legal validity of training on this data as a matter of fair use, especially for data with specific licenses, and of reproducing this data, remains unclear.<p>It&#x27;s noteworthy that Fair Use is a largely American doctrine that does not appear in European copyright law across the board.

I was actually fearing something very stupid coming from the EU, but the requirements&#x2F;questions asked (if it&#x27;s only that from the table) are fairly ok!

I gotta say I don&#x27;t see the point of the two compute requirements - the measure energy and reduce energy consumption part seems like it would be something a company would want to do by itself as that is a cost.<p>and I&#x27;m not sure what disclosing the training time and power used to train the model tells anyone?<p>on edit: tells anyone that is a consumer of the product and might have legitimate worries which would be a good prompt to legislation, added edit in for eager HN downvoter who didn&#x27;t like my asking the question.

We are a Japan based AI firm. We will not comply with the EU AI Act. We will be releasing our AI models MIT open source. Let them deal with that.

I expect that the EU will have enough regulation to make EU native AI companies comparatively uncompetitive but not actually enforce those regulations because of the economic and political disadvantages of doing so. Seems like the worst of all worlds to me but what do I know.

Well, I&#x27;m not sure about the EU AI Act, but I&#x27;m pretty sure they&#x27;re still struggling with the &#x27;Don&#x27;t Turn Skynet On&#x27; Act.

It is important to note acts of EU parliament are just one stage of EU lawmaking and the fact &quot;an act has passed&quot; doesn&#x27;t make it a law. Once such act has been passed there are many steps EU as well as member states have to take to make it law.<p>So, this article is very useful, but it really is just an analysis of compliance with _proposed_ law.<p>For it to become real law EU council has to agree unanimously (made up of prime ministers of all member states). Then each one of 27 countries has to implement the law following it&#x27;s democratic process (national parliament, president, it has to pass any constitutional challenges if any are made etc). Only then it becomes law.<p>It is a long tedious process and certain things are apriori excluded from EU&#x27;s jurisdiction altogether such as state level energy generation, anything that affects security situation and many others. So for decades now EU commission and the Court of justice of EU have been working very hard on &quot;scope creep&quot; of existing laws. It&#x27;s a bonanza of opportunity for most powerful EU states to squeeze the smaller ones, for powerful external groups to influence whatever they want and so on. Seriously, after the horrible fiasco of Brexit (for EU, as I&#x27;m considering it from that perspective), loosing one of the most developed and competitive countries on Earth the EU should really have had a proper reform. There are many reasons why EU couldn&#x27;t retain UK as a member. Arrogance of the commission, is but one of them. Now from the perspective of many years it is very clear booting UK out (and making it think it was it&#x27;s own idea) was Franco-German (Russian sponsored) plan from the start.