Academics from The City Law School and School of Science & Technology host all-day workshop at City St George’s.
On Monday 8 June, The City Law School, City St George’s, University of London hosted The Platform State Meets IP: Constitutional Accountability for Proprietary AI, an international workshop that brought together leading academics, legal practitioners, and researchers to examine the rapidly evolving relationship among artificial intelligence, intellectual property law, and constitutional accountability.
Hosted by Enrico Bonadio, Professor of Intellectual Property Law, The City Law School, Eduardo Alonso, Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the School of Science & Technology at City St George’s, and Nicola Lucchi, Professor of Law at University Pompeu Fabra of Barcelona, the workshop showcased emerging research and specialist expertise from scholars and practitioners from across Europe. Throughout the day, speakers explored questions surrounding transparency, regulation, intellectual property rights, fundamental rights and the growing influence of technology companies on legal and regulatory frameworks.
Opening the workshop, Professor Bonadio highlighted the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in addressing the legal challenges posed by artificial intelligence. He noted that intellectual property lawyers, constitutional scholars, economists and technology experts each bring distinct perspectives that are essential for understanding AI's broader societal impact.
Professor Bonadio encouraged participants to engage with several pressing questions increasingly confronting lawmakers and regulators. These included who controls the level of openness and opacity within digital platforms, who should bear responsibility when harms occur, and how established legal concepts such as safe harbours, notice-and-takedown procedures and standards-setting mechanisms are being reshaped by AI technologies.
While acknowledging that definitive answers remain elusive, he stressed the importance of collaborative discussion and interdisciplinary thinking in responding to these emerging challenges.
One of the conference's keynote presentations was delivered by Professor Eduardo Alonso, whose talk, GenAI Trade Secrets: Transparency and the Convenient Myth of the Black Box, challenged widespread assumptions about the supposed unknowability of artificial intelligence systems.
Professor Alonso argued that descriptions of AI models as "black boxes" often obscure the reality that developers possess significant knowledge about how these systems are designed, trained and operated. He questioned the narrative that AI systems are inherently mysterious, suggesting that such claims can sometimes be used to resist demands for greater transparency and accountability.
Highlights
Addressing the relationship between trade secret protection and transparency obligations, Professor Alonso argued that AI companies cannot simultaneously claim extensive knowledge of their systems when seeking intellectual property protection while also maintaining that those same systems are too complex to understand when questions of accountability arise.
Concluding his presentation, he argued that there is "nothing inherently mysterious" about AI systems and that they should be subject to auditing and scrutiny in the same way as other software technologies. Greater transparency, he suggested, is essential if regulators, courts and the public are to meaningfully assess the risks and impacts associated with increasingly powerful AI models.
The conference also examined the constitutional dimensions of artificial intelligence regulation through a presentation by Professor Giuseppe Martinico and Matteo Monti of the Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies. Drawing on their ongoing research, they explored how constitutional rights arguments are increasingly being deployed in disputes concerning AI regulation.
Their presentation, Weaponising Free Speech: Constitutional Distortion, Techno-Anarchism and the Erosion of Intellectual Property in the AI Era, analysed how some technology companies are using freedom of expression as a strategic legal tool to challenge regulatory measures related to AI training data, transparency requirements, and copyright enforcement.
While freedom of expression remains a cornerstone of democratic legal systems, the speakers argued that its application in AI-related litigation raises important questions about the balance among innovation, intellectual property protection, and public accountability.
Their research suggested that contemporary disputes over artificial intelligence may represent the latest chapter in a broader history of constitutional rights being mobilised as mechanisms of regulatory resistance. Whether such arguments ultimately succeed before the courts, the presenters noted, they reveal the increasingly significant role constitutional law is playing in shaping the future governance of AI technologies.
Highlights and networking
Another key contribution came from Professor Tuomas Mylly of the University of Turku, who shared research examining the role of harmonised technical standards under the European Union's AI Act.
Professor Mylly explored how these standards translate broad legal principles into practical regulatory requirements and increasingly determine how organisations demonstrate compliance with AI legislation. As a result, they play a significant role in shaping the day-to-day implementation of AI governance across Europe.
Nevertheless, he argued that this reliance on technical standards raises a series of important legal and constitutional questions. In particular, he highlighted concerns surrounding democratic legitimacy, transparency, copyright, patents, trade secrets and access to law. If technical standards increasingly determine how fundamental rights protections are applied in practice, questions emerge regarding who controls access to those standards and how they can be scrutinised by the public.
His presentation emphasised that ensuring public accessibility and accountability is becoming increasingly important as technical standards take on a more central role within AI regulation. As legal obligations become intertwined with privately developed standards, policymakers must consider how to preserve transparency and democratic oversight.
As artificial intelligence continues to transform industries, institutions and everyday life, discussions such as those held at the workshop will become increasingly important. It demonstrated that the governance of artificial intelligence cannot be understood through a single legal lens, the complexity of the challenges that lie ahead and the vital role that legal scholarship and interdisciplinary research will play in shaping the future governance of AI.
Written by Ellie Norman