{"id":108506,"date":"2025-04-29T18:22:26","date_gmt":"2025-04-29T22:22:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/?post_type=insight&#038;p=108506"},"modified":"2025-04-30T03:43:34","modified_gmt":"2025-04-30T07:43:34","slug":"cdt-europes-ai-bulletin-april-2025","status":"publish","type":"insight","link":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/insights\/cdt-europes-ai-bulletin-april-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"CDT Europe\u2019s AI Bulletin: April 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>AILD Withdrawal Maintained Despite Concerns from Civil Society and Lawmakers<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On 7 April, CDT Europe <a href=index-1106.html>joined a coalition of civil society organisations<\/a> in sending an <a href=index-1107.html>open letter<\/a> to European Commission Executive Vice-President Virkkunen and Commissioner McGrath, expressing deep concern over the Commission\u2019s recent decision to withdraw the proposed Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD) and stressing the urgent need to immediately begin preparatory work on a new, robust liability framework. We argued that the proposal is necessary because individuals seeking compensation for AI-induced harm will need to prove that damage was caused by a faulty AI system, which would be an insurmountable burden without a liability framework.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In a scheduled <a href=index-1108.html>hearing<\/a> before the European Parliament\u2019s JURI Committee Commissioner Virkkunen defended the withdrawal, restating the need to reduce overlapping obligations and ensure simpler compliance with the digital acquis for businesses. Crucially, she suggested fully implementing and enforcing the AI Act before any new legislation would be proposed.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Following the hearing, the Rapporteur of the Directive, Axel Voss, as well as the Rapporteur of the AI Act, Brando Benifei, sent a <a href=axel-voss-a1744969_joined-letter-on-the-ai-liability-directive-activity-7315737756901474304-eu5_946b.html>joint letter to the European Commission<\/a> expressing their concern over the proposed withdrawal. They recalled that several key proposals of the European Parliament were withdrawn during the AI Act negotiations based on the promise that the AILD would address those concerns. They also noted the persisting gaps for victims of AI-specific harms, and suggested that the Commission include an updated proposal as part of the upcoming Digital Omnibus Package.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>AI Continent Plan Unveiled by the European Commission<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The European Commission published the <a href=index-1109.html>AI Continent Action Plan<\/a> on 9 April, outlining their strategy to support AI scale-up in the EU through five distinct pillars including computing infrastructure, data, regulatory simplification, and attracting talent. The most notable suggestions include a Data Union Strategy and regulatory simplification measures, both aimed at reducing compliance burdens and removing structural bottlenecks for AI developers and deployers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Data Union Strategy, set for release in Q3 2025, is designed to improve access and use of high-quality and sector-specific data across the EU by improving cross-border data availability, including by reducing the legal and technical conditions for data-sharing. In this regard, the Plan announces a <a href=index-1110.html>public consultation set to open in May 2025<\/a>, where stakeholders will be asked to describe current barriers to accessing data and how to simplify compliance with EU data rules.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Action Plan similarly considers regulatory simplification in connection with the AI Act, announcing as a first step the July 2025 establishment of an AI Act Service Desk to provide practical compliance guidance, interactive tools, and direct support for startups and SMEs. However, in a <a href=index-1111.html>public consultation<\/a> launched simultaneously, the European Commission prompts stakeholders to identify<em> <\/em>regulatory challenges and recommend further measures to facilitate compliance and possible simplification of the AI Act, paving the way for further deregulatory efforts.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Finally, the plan includes a proposal for a <a href=index-1112.html>Cloud and AI Development Act<\/a>, expected by early 2026, to fast-track environmental permits for data centres, enable a common<strong> <\/strong>EU cloud services marketplace, and scale the EU\u2019s computing infrastructure, explicitly seeking to triple EU data centre capacity by 2035.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Commission&#8217;s AI Continent Action Plan sets out a roadmap for five consultative processes in total:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>A call for evidence for a <a href=index-1113.html>European Strategy for AI in science<\/a>, with a submission deadline of 5 June 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A call for evidence and public consultation on the <a href=index-1111.html>Apply AI Strategy<\/a>, with a submission deadline of 4 June 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A public consultation on the <a href=index-1114.html>Data Union Strategy<\/a>, expected to open in May 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A call for evidence and public consultation on the <a href=index-1112.html>Cloud and AI Development Act<\/a>, with a submission deadline of 4 June 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A call for interest on <a href=index-1115.html>AI GigaFactories<\/a>, with a submission deadline of 20 June 2025<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Public Consultation on Guidelines for General-Purpose AI Models Opened<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The European Commission <a href=index-1116.html>opened a public consultation<\/a> seeking input that will feed into the upcoming guidelines under the AI Act on general-purpose AI (GPAI) models, which are distinct from the ongoing Code of Practice process. These guidelines are aimed to provide more clarity on various issues, including the definition of GPAI models; the definition of providers along the value chain; the clarification of what \u2018placing on the market\u2019 entails; and specifications regarding the exemption for open-source models. They will also provide more detail on the enforcement approach taken by the AI Office.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The guidelines will complement the Code of Practice on GPAI by explaining what signing and adhering to the Code of Practice means for companies. While the Code of Practice addresses GPAI model providers\u2019 obligations, the guidelines clarify to whom and when those obligations apply. According to the consultation, both the guidelines and the final Code of Practice are expected to be published before August 2025. The <a href=index-1117.html>consultation is open for all interested stakeholders<\/a> until 22 May.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>In Other \u2018AI &amp; EU\u2019 News<\/strong>&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The deadline for the final draft of the Code of Practice on general-purpose AI models to be published is 2 May. However, the <a href=index-1116.html>latest consultation<\/a> by the European Commission on GPAI models suggests that the publication may take place in either May or June this year.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) <a href=index-1118.html>opened<\/a> an investigation into the Grok AI model developed by xAI. In particular, the DPC will examine whether training the model on publicly-accessible posts by EU users on the platform X is compliant with xAI\u2019s obligations under the General Data Protection Regulation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Following <a href=index-1119.html>Meta\u2019s announcement<\/a> that it would train its AI using public content shared by adults on their products in the EU, several data protection authorities \u2014&nbsp;including those from <a href=index-1120.html>France<\/a>, <a href=index-1121.html>Belgium<\/a>, <a href=index-1122.html>the Netherlands,<\/a> and <a href=index-1123.html>Hamburg<\/a> \u2014&nbsp; notified EU residents that they can take steps to object to the processing. Users wishing to object will have to do so before 27 May.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>30 MEPs <a href=index-1124.html>warned the European Commission<\/a> against watering down its definition of open-source AI. The letter\u2019s signatories asked the Commission to clarify that certain models, such as those in Meta\u2019s Llama series, are not considered open-source under the AI Act, given that Meta does not share the training code of its models and prohibits the use of its models to train other AI systems. They therefore asked the Commission to consider developing guidance on the meaning of open-source for the purpose of enforcing the AI Act, taking into account international standards including the <a href=index-1125.html>Open Source Initiative<\/a>.<br><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Spain\u2019s <a href=httphandlerparticipacionpublicaanexosf682.html>AI draft bill<\/a> has come under fire by academics and civil society organisations for a provision that exempts public authorities from administrative fines. <a href=index-1126.html>Critics argue<\/a> that the exemption could weaken enforcement of AI safeguards and dilute protection of individual rights. For example, misuse of prohibited technologies, such as real-time remote biometric identification, by public bodies would result only <a href=index-1127.html>in a warning and cessation of the activity<\/a>. Civil society is calling for removal of the exemption, as well as introduction of disciplinary measures for officials, including disqualification from public office.<br><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The next public webinar in the AI Pact series, which aims to promote knowledge-sharing and provide participants with a better understanding of the AI Act and its implementation, will be held on 27 May. You can find <a href=index-1128.html>more information, as well as recordings of the past events, here<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Content of the Month \ud83d\udcda\ud83d\udcfa\ud83c\udfa7<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>CDT Europe presents our freshly curated recommended reads for the month. For more on AI, take a look at <\/em><a href=index2c6b-2.html#results\"><em>CDT\u2019s <\/em><\/a><em>work.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Interface and Ada Lovelace Institute, <a href=index-1129.html>An Autonomy-Based Classification<\/a>&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>EU Observer, <a href=index-1130.html>Gutting AI Transparency in the Name of Deregulation Will Not Help Europe<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Politico, <a href=index-1131.html>EU Opens the Door to Reworking AI Rulebook<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Tech Policy Press, <a href=index-1132.html>The EU AI Continent Action Plan: Hype, Burn, Rinse and Repeat<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>CSIS, <a href=index-1133.html>The EU AI Continent Action Plan<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":108509,"template":"","content_type":[10213],"area-of-focus":[834,652],"class_list":["post-108506","insight","type-insight","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","content_type-newsletter","area-of-focus-ai-policy-governance","area-of-focus-european-policy"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/108506","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/insight"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/108506\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":108510,"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/108506\/revisions\/108510"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/108509"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=108506"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"content_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/content_type?post=108506"},{"taxonomy":"area-of-focus","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdt.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/area-of-focus?post=108506"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}