Overview
Title
To require the Office of Information and Communication Technology Services and other Federal agencies to develop a list of artificial intelligence products and services, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants the government to make a list of certain robots and computer programs that might be dangerous, especially if they come from countries we're worried about. The government shouldn't buy or use these robots or programs unless it's for special security reasons.
Summary AI
The bill, S. 4976, titled the "Artificial Intelligence Acquisitions Act of 2024," would require the Office of Information and Communication Technology Services and other federal agencies to create a list of artificial intelligence products and services that pose national security risks, especially if they are developed by foreign entities of concern. It prohibits federal agencies from purchasing or funding AI products and services from this list, unless it's for intelligence or certain Department of Defense activities. The bill mandates this list to be updated annually and for entities doing business with the federal government to stop using listed products within specified timeframes.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, known as the "Artificial Intelligence Acquisitions Act of 2024," seeks to establish a framework for identifying and regulating artificial intelligence (AI) products and services that pose national security risks to the United States. The bill mandates the Office of Information and Communication Technology Services, along with other federal entities, to create and maintain a list of AI products and services linked to countries or entities deemed as potential security threats, labeled as "countries of concern." These countries include China, Russia, Iran, and others. Moreover, federal agencies would be prohibited from purchasing or engaging with these identified AI products or services, with certain exceptions for national security and defense activities.
Summary of Significant Issues
A notable issue within the bill is the political sensitivity surrounding the explicit identification of specific countries as "countries of concern." This could potentially lead to diplomatic tensions. Furthermore, the term "foreign person of concern" is considered vague, leading to challenges in enforcement and interpretation, especially when assessing the influence these entities may have.
The legislation also introduces an administrative burden due to the continual need for monitoring and updating the list of prohibited products and services. This may pose challenges for government operations and supply chains. Another prominent concern is the absence of a review or appeal process for entities that might be wrongly listed, which raises questions about transparency and fairness in administration.
Broad Impact on the Public
For the general public, this bill could impact how AI technologies are integrated into public services and governmental functions. By restricting access to AI products from certain foreign entities, the government aims to safeguard sensitive information and maintain national security. However, these constraints may also slow down the adoption and innovation of AI technologies in public systems, potentially affecting the efficiency of services available to citizens.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Agencies: While the bill intends to protect national security, it could create operational hurdles for federal agencies. The need for constant vigilance and updates to the list could lead to additional administrative costs and labor.
Contractors and Businesses: Companies that supply AI products or services to federal agencies might experience financial and logistical strain due to the enactment's divestment provisions. The timelines for divestment and the lack of a clear appeal process could result in disrupted business operations and possible loss of government contracts.
International Relations and Businesses: The explicit naming of countries as "countries of concern" could strain U.S. diplomatic relations and might deter foreign businesses from collaboration. This could stifle international innovation and collaboration, which are usually vital components of technological advancement.
National Security: On the positive side, by cutting off access to potentially risky AI products and services, the bill aims to curb security threats and protect sensitive information from foreign adversaries. This measure could help strengthen U.S. cybersecurity and resource integrity in the power and technology sectors.
Overall, while the bill's objective is to heighten national security around AI technologies, careful attention to the outlined issues and their resolutions is essential to balance protective measures with the need for innovation and international cooperation.
Issues
The term 'country of concern' in Section 2 is politically sensitive, as it explicitly names certain countries, potentially leading to diplomatic implications and tensions with the countries mentioned.
The term 'foreign person of concern' in Section 2 is vague and broad, which could lead to enforcement challenges and interpretation issues, especially in determining control and influence by foreign governments.
The criteria for what constitutes a 'foreign person of concern' is not explicitly defined in Section 3, which may result in ambiguity when determining which AI products or services pose national security risks.
Section 4's prohibition on purchasing products from foreign persons of concern may result in significant administrative burdens due to necessary monitoring and updates, potentially disrupting supply chains and affecting government operations.
The lack of a review or appeal process in Section 4 for entities unjustly placed on the list of prohibited products may lead to legal disputes and claims of unfair treatment.
The divestment timelines outlined in Section 4 may pose practical challenges for contractors, potentially causing operational disruptions and financial implications.
Section 3's language on public notification of list updates is convoluted, which could cause misunderstandings about how updates are communicated to the public.
Section 2's reliance on definitions from other laws and regulations might lead to ambiguity if those sources change, causing potential legal uncertainties.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill states that the law can be referred to as the "Artificial Intelligence Acquisitions Act of 2024."
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section defines various terms used in the document, including "artificial intelligence," "control," and "country of concern"—which includes countries like China and Russia, among others. It also explains what is meant by terms such as "Firmware," "Foreign Person of Concern," "Person," and "Semiconductor Chip Product," often referencing other legal documents or regulations for their official definitions.
3. Determination of artificial intelligence and large language model products or services posing national security risks Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a process for creating, publishing, and updating a list of artificial intelligence products or services that might pose national security risks because they involve foreign parties at risk. It specifies who will be responsible for this task, how updates can remove items from the list, and ensures that the public is informed when no updates are necessary.
4. Prohibition on purchase of covered artificial intelligence and large language model products and services Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section prohibits Federal departments and agencies from purchasing or contracting services involving certain artificial intelligence or large language model products starting 30 days after a specified list is published. It also requires that anyone already using these products for federal contracts must stop using them within two years of the Act's enactment, unless they pertain to national security or defense intelligence activities, which are exempt from these rules.