Regulators in the US and Europe have the “shared principles” they plan to adhere to in order to “protect competition and consumers” when it comes to artificial intelligence. “Guided by our respective laws, we will work to ensure effective competition and the fair and honest treatment of consumers and businesses,” the , , and the UK’s said.
“Technological inflection points can introduce new means of competing, catalyzing opportunity, innovation and growth,” the agencies said in . “Accordingly, we must work to ensure the public reaps the full benefits of these moments.”
The regulators pinpointed fair dealing (i.e. making sure major players in the sector avoid exclusionary tactics), interoperability and choice as the three principles for protecting competition in the AI space. They based these factors on their experience working in related markets.
The agencies also laid out some potential risks to competition, such as deals between major players in the market. They said that while arrangements between companies in the sector (which are ) may not impact competition in some cases, in others “these partnerships and investments could be used by major firms to undermine or co opt competitive threats and steer market outcomes in their favor at the expense of the public.”
Other risks to competition flagged in the statement include the entrenching or extension of market power in AI-related markets as well as the “concentrated control of key inputs.” The agencies define the latter as a small number of companies potentially having an outsized influence over the AI space due to the control and supply of “specialized chips, substantial compute, data at scale and specialist technical expertise.”
In addition, the CMA, DOJ and FTC say they’ll be on the lookout for threats that AI might pose to consumers. The statement notes that it’s important for consumers to be kept in the loop about how AI factors into the products and services they buy or use. “Firms that deceptively or unfairly use consumer data to train their models can undermine people’s privacy, security, and autonomy,” the statement reads. “Firms that use business customers’ data to train their models could also expose competitively sensitive information.”
These are all fairly generalized statements about the agencies’ common approach to fostering competition in the AI space, but given that they all operate under different laws, it would be difficult for the statement to go into the specifics of how they’ll regulate. At the very least, the statement should serve as a reminder to companies working in the generative AI space that regulators are keeping a close eye on things, even amid rapidly accelerating advancements in the sector.
