Dangerous Criminals and Beautiful Prostitutes? Investigating Harmful Representations in Dutch Language Models external link

Lin, Z., Trogrlić, G., Vreese, C.H. de & Helberger, N.
FAccT '25: Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp: 11005 - 1014, 2025

Abstract

While language-based AI is becoming increasingly popular, ensuring that these systems are socially responsible is essential. Despite their growing impact, large language models (LLMs), the engines of many language-driven applications, remain largely in the black box. Concerns about LLMs reinforcing harmful representations are shared by academia, industries, and the public. In professional contexts, researchers rely on LLMs for computational tasks such as text classification and contextual prediction, during which the risk of perpetuating biases cannot be overlooked. In a broader society where LLM-powered tools are widely accessible, interacting with biased models can shape public perceptions and behaviors, potentially reinforcing problematic social issues over time. This study investigates harmful representations in LLMs, focusing on ethnicity and gender in the Dutch context. Through template-based sentence construction and model probing, we identified potentially harmful representations using both automated and manual content analysis at the lexical and sentence levels, combining quantitative measurements with qualitative insights. Our findings have important ethical, legal, and political implications, challenging the acceptability of such harmful representations and emphasizing the need for effective mitigation strategies. Warning: This paper contains examples of language that some people may find offensive or upsetting.

Artificial intelligence, language models

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Opinie: AI wordt alleen té slim, als we onszelf dom voordoen external link

Trouw, 2025

Abstract

Wie denkt dat ChatGPT een therapeut kan vervangen, onderschat onze complexe sociale werkelijkheid, betoogt filosoof Marijn Sax.

Artificial intelligence

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

AI governance in the spotlight: an empirical analysis of Dutch political parties’ strategies for the 2023 elections external link

Morosoli, S., Kieslich, K., Resendez, V. & Drunen, M. van
Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 2025

Abstract

AI-based technologies are having an increasing impact on society, which raises the question of how this technology will be addressed politically. Thereby, political actors have a dual role to play: They can provide investment to enhance the development and subsequent adoption of these systems while also bearing the responsibility of safeguarding citizens from harm. Hereby, the degree of politicization of the topic, i.e. if a topic is part of the public and political debate, has an immense influence on the political approach to tackle the issue. The more a topic is politicized, the more urgency political parties experience to develop concrete governance approaches. Yet, existing research has not analyzed party programs in terms of discourse around artificial intelligence and policy recommendations. This study focuses on the Netherlands and explores how Dutch political parties discuss AI in their political programs for the 2023 election. We conducted a manual content analysis of all party manifestos for the 2023 elections. Our analysis shows that most parties do not place a big emphasis on AI. And if so, most of the policy proposals are rather reactive to issues that happened in the past, rather than taking a prospective governance approach.

Artificial intelligence, governance, Politics

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Do AI models dream of dolphins in lake Balaton? external link

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2025

Artificial intelligence, Copyright

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Procedural Justice and Judicial AI; Substantiating Explainability Rights with the Values of Contestation external link

Metikoš, L. & Domselaar, I. van
2025

Abstract

The advent of opaque assistive AI in courtrooms has raised concerns about the contestability of these systems, and their impact on procedural justice. The right to an explanation under the GDPR and the AI Act could address the inscrutability of judicial AI for litigants. To substantiate this right in the domain of justice, we examine utilitarian, rights-based (including dignitarian and Dworkinian approaches), and relational theories of procedural justice. These theories reveal diverse perspectives on contestation, which can help shape explainability rights in the context of judicial AI. These theories respectively highlight different values of litigant contestation: it has instrumental value in error correction, and intrinsic value in respecting litigants' dignity, either as rational autonomous agents or as socio-relational beings. These insights help us answer three central and practical questions on how the right to an explanation should be operationalized to enable litigant contestation: should explanations be general or specific, to what extent do explanations need to be faithful to the system's actual behavior or merely provide a plausible approximation, and should more interpretable systems be used, even at the cost of accuracy? These questions are not strictly legal or technical in nature, but also rely on normative considerations. The practical operationalization of explainability will therefore differ between different valuations of litigant contestation of judicial AI.

Artificial intelligence, digital justice, Transparency

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Copyright Liability and Generative AI: What’s the Way Forward? download

Nordic Intellectual Property Law Review, iss. : 1, pp: 92-115, 2025

Abstract

The intersection of copyright liability and generative AI has become one of the most complex and debated issues in the field of copyright law. AI systems have advanced significantly to allow the creation of fantastic new content but they are also capable of producing outputs that evoke, adapt, or recreate content that is protected by copyright law, sparking several infringement proceedings against AI companies, particularly in the US. With this rapid evolution comes the need to re-examine existing legal frameworks and theories. In this contribution, I would like to focus on liability challenges at the output stage of AI content generation and share some insights from Sweden to finally ponder about possible paths forward.

Artificial intelligence, Copyright, Generative AI, liability

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Dun & Bradstreet: A Pyrrhic Victory for the Contestation of AI under the GDPR external link

The Law, Ethics & Policy of AI Blog, 2025

Abstract

The CJEU’s ruling in Dun & Bradstreet clarifies how the GDPR’s ‘right to an explanation’ should enable individuals to contest AI-based decision-making. It states that explanations need to be understandable while also respecting trade secrets and privacy concerns in a balanced manner. However, the Court excludes the disclosure of in-depth technical information and also introduces a burdensome balancing procedure. These requirements both strengthen and weaken the ability of individuals to independently assess impactful AI systems, leading to a pyrrhic victory for contestation.

Artificial intelligence, GDPR, Privacy

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Towards Planet Proof Computing: Law and Policy of Data Centre Sustainability in the European Union download

Commins, J. & Irion, K.
Technology and Regulation, vol. 25, pp: 1-36, 2025

Abstract

Our society’s growing reliance on digital technologies such as AI incurs an ever-growing ecological footprint. The EU regulation of the data centre sector aims to achieve climate-neutral, energy-efficient and sustainable data centres by no later than 2030. This article unpacks the EU law and policy which aims on improving energy efficiency, recycling equipment and increasing reporting and transparency obligations. In 2025 the Commission will present a report based on information reported by data centre operators and in light of the new evidence review its policy. Further regulation should aim to translate reporting requirements into binding sustainability targets to contain rebound effects of the data centre industry while strengthening the public value orientation of the industry.

Artificial intelligence, digitalisation, EU law

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

The rise of technology courts, or: How technology companies re-invent adjudication for a digital world

Computer Law & Security Review, vol. 56, num: 106118, 2025

Abstract

The article “The Rise of Technology Courts” explores the evolving role of courts in the digital world, where technological advancements and artificial intelligence (AI) are transforming traditional adjudication processes. It argues that traditional courts are undergoing a significant transition due to digitization and the increasing influence of technology companies. The paper frames this transformation through the concept of the “sphere of the digital,” which explains how digital technology and AI redefine societal expectations of what courts should be and how they function. The article highlights that technology is not only changing the materiality of courts—moving from physical buildings to digital portals—but also affecting their symbolic function as public institutions. It discusses the emergence of AI-powered judicial services, online dispute resolution (ODR), and technology-driven alternative adjudication bodies like the Meta Oversight Board. These developments challenge the traditional notions of judicial authority, jurisdiction, and legal expertise. The paper concludes that while these technology-driven solutions offer increased efficiency and accessibility, they also raise fundamental questions about the legitimacy, transparency, and independence of adjudicatory bodies. As technology companies continue to shape digital justice, the article also argues that there are lessons to learn for the role and structure of traditional courts to ensure that human rights and public values are upheld.

Artificial intelligence, big tech, digital transformation, digitisation, justice, values

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

The paradox of lawful text and data mining? Some experiences from the research sector and where we (should) go from here external link

GRUR International, vol. 74, iss. : 4, pp: 307-319, 2025

Abstract

Scientific research can be tricky business. This paper critically explores the 'lawful access' requirement in European copyright law which applies to text and data mining (TDM) carried out for the purpose of scientific research. Whereas TDM is essential for data analysis, artificial intelligence (AI) and innovation, the paper argues that the 'lawful access' requirement in Article 3 CDSM Directive may actually restrict research by complicating the applicability of the TDM provision or even rendering it inoperable. Although the requirement is intended to ensure that researchers act in good faith before deploying TMD tools for purposes such as machine learning, it forces them to ask for permission to access data, for example by taking out a subscription to a service, and for that reason provides the opportunity for copyright holders to apply all sorts of commercial strategies to set the legal and technological parameters of access and potentially even circumvent the mandatory character of the provision. The paper concludes by drawing on insights from the recent European Commission study 'Improving access to and reuse of research results, publications and data for scientific purposes' that offer essential perspectives for the future of TDM, and by suggesting a number of paths forward that EU Member States can take already now in order to support a more predictable and reliable legal regime for scientific TDM and potentially code mining to foster innovation.

Artificial intelligence, CDSM Directive, Copyright, Text and Data Mining (TDM)

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib