What’s the Problem with Deepseek? 

DeepSeek, the Chinese equivalent of ChatGPT, is making big waves in the AI world. Since its launch, it has quickly become the top-rated free app on Apple’s App Store, challenging the notion that the US leads the world in AI development. 

DeepSeek’s Chinese developers released the latest version of its app on 20th January (the day of US President Trump’s inauguration) rapidly gaining attention from AI experts and the tech industry. Powered by the open-source DeepSeek-V3 model, it was reportedly developed for less than $6 million, a fraction of the billions spent by its US rivals. Recently, OpenAI and other companies pledged to invest $500 billion in US AI infrastructure. President Trump announced this as “the largest AI infrastructure project in history” to maintain technological leadership in the US. However, DeepSeek’s emergence has impacted US tech stocks. On Monday the Nasdaq index dropped 3%, with chip-making giant Nvidia losing almost $600 billion in market value—the biggest one-day loss in US stock market history.  

Privacy Issues 

While the Chinese media and open-source AI proponents may be celebrating, DeepSeek’s rise necessitates scrutiny regarding its privacy and security risks. Some of these are:  

  • Data Collected: DeepSeek gathers sensitive personal data through natural conversations. 
  • Potential for Influence and Manipulation: As an AI chatbot, DeepSeek can shape opinions and conduct influence campaigns. 
  • Data Storage and Accessibility: Data stored on servers in China is fully accessible to the Chinese government. 
  • Level of User Engagement: Users may unknowingly reveal personal or confidential information through interactive conversations. 

Many of these issues are the same as TikTok which was temporarily banned in the US last week. 

Organisations need to closely monitor the AI models employees use; the US Navy recently advised its members to avoid using DeepSeek due to potential security and ethical concerns. It is also important to establish clear policies, procedures, and guidance, especially regarding GDPR compliance.  

Yesterday the Irish Data Protection Commission confirmed to TechCrunch that it has sent a note to DeepSeek requesting details concerning how the data of citizens in Ireland is processed by the company. The Italian data protection regulator has sent a similar note to the company and the DeepSeek mobile app no longer appears in both the Google and Apple app stores in Italy. 

Meanwhile (and with a straight face) OpenAI has accused DeepSeek of distilling knowledge from its models, breaching terms of use, and infringing on intellectual property. OpenAI, is itself facing numerous AI copyright lawsuits! 

2025 has just started and the AI news feed is already buzzing.  

Join ourArtificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, How to Implement Good Information Governanceworkshop.   

Enjoy reading our blog? Help us reach 10,000 subscribers by subscribing today! 

ICO 5th Call for Evidence on Generative AI 

Recently we wrote about how “How Generative AI’s Data Appetite is Fuelling Privacy Battles.” Last week the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) published its fifth call for evidence on Generative AI.  This call focuses on the allocation of accountability for data protection compliance across the generative AI supply chain. It is part of the ICO’s consultation series on generative AI ICO consultation series on generative AI and data protection

The fifth call for evidence addresses the recommendation for ICO guidance on the allocation of accountability in AI as a Service (AIaaS) contexts made in Sir Patrick Vallance’s Pro-innovation Regulation of Technologies Review.  
 
The allocation of accountability is complicated because of the different ways in which generative AI models, applications and services are developed, used and disseminated, but also the different levels of control and accountability that participating organisations may have.  
 
The ICO is interested in additional evidence on how this works in practice. In the meantime, it provides a summary of our current analysis, the policy positions we want to consult on and some examples which show how this analysis could be applied in practice.  
 
The deadline for submissions is 18th  September 2024.  

Enjoy reading our blog? Help us reach 10,000 subscribers by subscribing today! 
 
Join our Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, How to Implement Good Information Governance workshop for hands-on insights, key resource awareness, and best practices, ensuring you’re ready to navigate AI complexities fairly and lawfully. 

Microsoft Recall Has a Privacy Problem

Microsoft’s upcoming feature, Recall has raised concerns about users’ privacy and its compliance with GDPR. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) says it is contacting Microsoft for more information about the product

Recall captures encrypted snapshots of users’ screen and stores them locally on their computer. It is part of the new Copilot+ PCs. Microsoft insists that Recall is an “optional experience” designed with privacy in mind. Users can control which snapshots are collected, and Microsoft claims that no external parties, including themselves, can access these images without physical access to the device.

Despite Microsoft’s reassurances, the ICO is investigating the safeguards in place to protect user privacy. An ICO spokesperson said firms must “rigorously assess and mitigate risks to peoples’ rights and freedoms” before bringing any new products to market. “We are making enquiries with Microsoft to understand the safeguards in place to protect user privacy,” they said.

With the potential exposure of sensitive information including passwords, financial details, and personal queries captured in screenshots, Microsoft, as well as corporate users of the new feature, are going to have to evidence how they intend to comply with GDPR’s security obligations as set out in Article 32.

AI remains a key priority for the ICO. It has launched a series of consultations on how aspects of data protection law should apply to the development and use of generative AI models, building on its extensive guidance on data protection and AI. The ICO’s proactive stance underscores the importance of stringent robust user control and data protection measures when it comes to implementing AI powered tools. 

Join our Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, How to Implement Good Information Governance workshop for hands-on insights, key resource awareness, and best practices, ensuring you’re ready to navigate AI complexities fairly and lawfully.

Exploring the Legal and Regulatory Challenges of AI and Chat GPT 

In our recent blog post, entitled “GDPR and AI: The Rise of the Machines”, we said that 2023 is going to be the year of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Events so far seem to suggest that advances in the technology as well legal and regulatory challenges are on the horizon.   

Generative AI, particularly large language models like ChatGPT, have captured the world’s imagination. ChatGPT registered 100 million monthly users in January alone; having only been launched in November and it set the record for the fastest growing platform since TikTok, which took nine months to hit the same usage level. In March 2023, it recorded 1.6 Billion user visits which are just mind-boggling numbers and shows how much of a technological advancement it will become. There have already been some amazing medical uses of generative AI including the ability to match drugs to patients, numerous stories of major cancer research breakthroughs as well as the ability for robots to do major surgery. 
 
However, it is important to take a step back and reflect on the risks of a technology that has made its own CEO “a bit scared” and which has caused the “Godfather of AI” to quit his job at Google. The regulatory and legal backlash against AI has already started. Recently, Italy became the first Western country to block ChatGPT. The Italian DPA highlighted privacy concerns relating to the model. Other European regulators are reported to be looking into the issue too. In April the European Data Protection Board launched a dedicated task force on ChatGPT. It said the goal is to “foster cooperation and to exchange information on possible enforcement actions conducted by data protection authorities.” Elsewhere, Canada has opened an investigation into OpenAI due to a complaint alleging the collection, use and disclosure of personal information is without consent. 

The UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has expressed its own concerns. Stephen Almond, Director of Technology and Innovation at the ICO, said in a blog post

“Data protection law still applies when the personal information that you’re processing comes from publicly accessible sources…We will act where organisations are not following the law and considering the impact on individuals.”  

Wider Concerns 

ChatGPT suffered its first major personal data breach in March.
According to a blog post by OpenAI, the breach exposed payment-related and other personal information of 1.2% of the ChatGPT Plus subscribers. But the concerns around AI and ChatGPT don’t stop at privacy law.   

An Australian mayor is considering a defamation suit against ChatGPT after it told users that he was jailed for bribery; in reality he was the whistleblower in the bribery case. Similarly it falsely accused a US law professor of sexual assault. The Guardian reported recently that ChatGPT is making up fake Guardian articles. There are concerns about copyright law too; there have been a number of songs that use AI to clone the voices of artists including Drake and The Weeknd which has since  been removed from streaming services after criticism from music publishers. There has also been a full AI-Generated Joe Rogan episode with the OpenAI CEO as well as with Donald Trump. These podcasts are definitely worth a sample, it is frankly scary how realistic they actually are. 

AI also poses a significant threat to jobs. A report by investment bank Goldman Sachs says it could replace the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs. Our director, Ibrahim Hasan, recently gave his thoughts on this topic to BBC News Arabic. (You can watch him here. If you just want to hear Ibrahim “speak in Arabic” skip the video to 2min 48 secs!) 
 

EU Regulation 

With increasing concern about the future risks AI could pose to people’s privacy, their human rights or their safety, many experts and policy makers believe AI needs to be regulated. The European Union’s proposed legislation, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, focuses primarily on strengthening rules around data quality, transparency, human oversight and accountability. It also aims to address ethical questions and implementation challenges in various sectors ranging from healthcare and education to finance and energy. 

The Act also envisages grading AI products according to how potentially harmful they might be and staggering regulation accordingly. So for example an email spam filter would be more lightly regulated than something designed to diagnose a medical condition – and some AI uses, such as social grading by governments, would be prohibited altogether. 

UK White Paper 

On 29th March 2023, the UK government published a white paper entitled “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation.” The paper sets out a new “flexible” approach to regulating AI which is intended to build public trust and make it easier for businesses to grow and create jobs. Unlike the EU there will be no new legislation to regulate AI. In its press release, the UK government says: 

“The government will avoid heavy-handed legislation which could stifle innovation and take an adaptable approach to regulating AI. Instead of giving responsibility for AI governance to a new single regulator, the government will empower existing regulators – such as the Health and Safety Executive, Equality and Human Rights Commission and Competition and Markets Authority – to come up with tailored, context-specific approaches that suit the way AI is actually being used in their sectors.” 

The white paper outlines the following five principles that regulators are to consider facilitating the safe and innovative use of AI in their industries: 

  • Safety, Security and Robustness: applications of AI should function in a secure, safe and robust way where risks are carefully managed; 

  • Transparency and Explainability: organizations developing and deploying AI should be able to communicate when and how it is used and explain a system’s decision-making process in an appropriate level of detail that matches the risks posed by the use of the AI; 

  • Fairness: AI should be used in a way which complies with the UK’s existing laws (e.g., the UK General Data Protection Regulation), and must not discriminate against individuals or create unfair commercial outcomes; 

  • Accountability and Governance: measures are needed to ensure there is appropriate oversight of the way AI is being used and clear accountability for the outcomes; and 

  • Contestability and Redress: people need to have clear routes to dispute harmful outcomes or decisions generated by AI 

Over the next 12 months, regulators will be tasked with issuing practical guidance to organisations, as well as other tools and resources such as risk assessment templates, that set out how the above five principles should be implemented in their sectors. The government has said this could be accompanied by legislation, when parliamentary time allows, to ensure consistency among the regulators. 

Michelle Donelan MP, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, considers that this this light-touch, principles-based approach “will enable . . . [the UK] to adapt as needed while providing industry with the clarity needed to innovate.” However, this approach does make the UK an outlier in comparison to global trends. Many other countries are developing or passing special laws to address alleged AI dangers, such as algorithmic rules imposed in China or the United States. Consumer groups and privacy advocates will also be concerned about the risks to society in the absence of detailed and unified statutory AI regulation.  

Want to know more about this rapidly developing area? Our forthcoming AI and Machine Learning workshop will explore the common challenges that this subject presents focussing on GDPR as well as other information governance and records management issues.