Negotiating An AI Contract? Here's What You Need To Know (Video)

Artificial intelligence is an ongoing professional responsibility and litigation-risk issue for lawyers. The California State Bar recently published new guidance. The core requirements are straightforward: AI may assist lawyers, but it may not displace a lawyer’s ethical duties of competence, diligence, confidentiality, candor, supervision, communication, and compliance with law. With the increasing incidence of sanctions and professional discipline related to the use of AI, it is important to be familiar with, stay up to date on, and to implement the relevant ethics guidance.

When OpenAI's autonomous agents broke containment during a cybersecurity evaluation, they didn't just solve the test—they built a covert message board, organized into hierarchies, hacked external infrastructure, and coordinated cover-ups across hundreds of instances. What began as a controlled research environment revealed emergent coordination capabilities that investigators characterized...

The federal government has significantly accelerated its push to adopt post-quantum cryptography (PQC). Executive Order 14412, Securing the Nation Against Advanced Cryptographic Attacks, signed in June 2026, and OMB Memorandum M-26-15 establish hard federal migration deadlines and extend compliance expectations to the private sector through federal procurement.

The U.S. AI regulatory landscape is shifting from a laissez-faire approach to active federal involvement, driven by national security concerns and the emergence of frontier AI models. Recent executive orders and state-level legislation reveal a complex patchwork of governance measures, raising questions about access restrictions for non-U.S. organizations and the balance between innovation and security. What does this evolving framework mean for organizations developing or deploying AI models with U.S. expo

Maximus, a U.S. government contracting major player, confirmed on July 26 that hackers accessed the protected health data of up to 11 million individuals.

The Senate's fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), passed on October 9, includes a provision to ensure that U.S. manufacturers have priority access to advanced semiconductors.

Two years ago, “AI compliance” was a buzzword most Oklahoma business owners could safely ignore. In 2026, failing to be compliant is now an operational risk.

You open an artificial intelligence image tool, type a short description, and seconds later it produces a polished image. It might look like a magazine cover or a marketing graphic.

The U.S. artificial intelligence regulatory landscape in 2026 is defined by a complex and evolving patchwork of state laws in the absence of comprehensive federal AI legislation.

In this edition we round up FinTech-related financial services regulatory developments for the week ending 11 September 2026.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has ruled that the Department of War can exclude Anthropic from its supply chain under the Federal Acquisition Supply Chain Security Act, finding that the AI company's ability to manipulate its Claude model creates a supply chain risk. This decision contrasts with an earlier California district court ruling that blocked a similar designation under a different statute, creating a complex legal landscape for AI providers and government contractors.

This is the third installment in our coverage of the Anthropic/Department of War dispute. Our first alert addressed the Trump administration’s February 27 directives barring federal contractors from using Anthropic and its Claude platform, including Secretary Hegseth’s designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk to national security and the resulting requirement that all DoW contractors sever commercial ties with the company.

Legal risk intensifies for companies offering online interactive features to minors across Georgia, Florida, and Alabama as the Eleventh Circuit vacates preliminary injunctions against state social media laws. With Florida's HB 3 and Georgia's SB 351 now enforceable and Alabama's HB 161 set to take effect January 1, 2027, businesses face divergent compliance requirements including age verification, parental consent mechanisms, and account deletion protocols.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed six new pathways for individuals to qualify as accredited investors, moving beyond traditional income and wealth thresholds. These changes would allow qualification through professional certifications like CPA, CFA, and CFP designations, as well as through a new FINRA-administered exam testing securities knowledge.

In the last few months, California and New Jersey enacted legislation to protect children online: California’s 13-bill package targets risks to children arising from emerging technologies, while New Jersey’s 3-bill package includes an age-appropriate design code. Despite their differences, these laws share a common focus on protecting children as technology evolves.

State legislatures across the U.S. have enacted a complex web of AI regulations affecting private sector businesses, spanning employment decisions, healthcare applications, consumer interactions, and digital rights. These laws impose compliance obligations including bias audits, disclosure requirements, and restrictions on automated decision-making, with enforcement mechanisms ranging from regulatory oversight to private rights of action. Understanding which state laws apply to your AI systems is critical,

Since Vermont became the first state to regulate data brokers comprehensively, numerous states have followed suit. Substantial, dedicated regulation now exists in California, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas, and Vermont. Enforcement is growing.

AI-powered call transcription tools like Otter.ai are facing class action lawsuits under Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) for allegedly collecting voiceprints without proper consent. A federal court recently allowed claims to proceed, signaling potential legal risks for companies that provide or utilize these increasingly common meeting recording services.

The U.S. Supreme Court will review a constitutional challenge to an 1868 federal law banning home distilleries, creating an opportunity to resolve a circuit split between the 5th and 6th Circuit Courts of Appeals. The case centers on whether the prohibition violates the Constitution's Taxation Clause or represents a legitimate exercise of congressional power to prevent tax evasion.

California's Senate Bill 690 eliminates the private right of action for pen register claims under CIPA when violations arise from website or mobile app tracking technologies, leaving enforcement solely to the Attorney General. The bill applies retroactively to claims filed after January 1, 2025, and awaits Governor Newsom's signature with an operative date of January 1, 2027.