LawTech.Asia

TechLaw.Fest 2024 Quick Chats: Chris Watson, Partner and Chair of Technology, Media and Communications, CMS

On 22nd October 2024

In Internet Governance, Interviews, Law Firms, Lawyers

Reading time: 5 minutes

Written by Josh Lee Kok Thong

TechLaw.Fest 2024 Quick Chats: Chris Watson, Partner and Chair of Technology, Media and Communications, CMS

TechLaw.Fest 2024 (“TLF”) took place from 11 to 12 September 2024, positioning participants at the forefront of groundbreaking discussions at the intersection of law, technology and business. This year, LawTech.Asia received a special opportunity to interview Chris Watson, Partner and Chair, Technology, Media and Communications at CMS. This interview came shortly after Chris Watson’s fireside chat titled “Breaking Barriers: A Conversation with Chris Watson and Emma Watson on Diversity, Inclusion and the Future” with Emma Watson, writer, actress and activist (who joined the conference via audio call).

With his vast and extensive expertise, Chris offers invaluable insights on a myriad of issues around technology regulation. We sought his views on the evolving AI regulation landscape, cross-border legal challenges, and the important role young legal professionals play in shaping the future of law and technology.

Unlocking Innovation: Hong Kong’s Legal Technology Landscape

By Josh Lee

On 3rd September 2024

In Access to Justice, Artificial Intelligence, Automation, Data Privacy, Dispute Resolution, Interviews, Law Firms, Lawyers, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation, Legal Technology in Hong Kong

Reading time: 22 minutes

Written by Yiap Siew Fong | Edited by Josh Lee Kok Thong

May 2024 was a particularly eventful month for legal technology in Hong Kong. It marked the return of the FT Innovative Lawyers Asia-Pacific Awards (“FT Awards”) to Hong Kong, showcasing the latest achievements in legal innovation throughout the region. The Hong Kong chapter of Asia-Pacific Legal Innovation and Technology Association (“ALITA”) also hosted a digital innovation roundtable in collaboration with the Law, Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship Lab at the University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law (“LITE Lab@HKU”). Earlier that month, a panel session at Hong Kong Mediation Week titled “Bots v Humans? The Future of Mediation” examined the implications and potential of AI in relation to the field of dispute resolution and mediation. These recent events provide an opportune context to examine the current state of the legal technology landscape in Hong Kong.

Artisans and Artifice: Doing Justice Together

By Josh Lee

On 10th August 2024

In Access to Justice, Artificial Intelligence, Lawyers, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation

Reading time: 4 minutes

Written by: Marc Lauritsen

Will AI make law better?

Yes.

For whom?

For many on both sides of the legal profession’s moat.

I’ll be brief.

(If you’re looking for verbosity, see my other writings. Links to some decorate this one.)

Computational Law: Past, Present, and Future

By Josh Lee

On 22nd June 2024

In Automation, Events, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation, Legal Research, Smart Contracts

Reading time: 5 minutes

Written by: Alexis Sudrajat and Alexis N. Chun

The inaugural Computational Law Conference (“CLAWCON“) ran from 12 to 14 July 2023. Hosted in the Singapore Management University (“SMU“), the event saw speakers and attendees from private, public, regulatory, and academic organisations, some of whom had flown in from all over the world. They had come together to discuss the issues surrounding computational law from a multi- and interdisciplinary perspective. It was organised by SMU’s Centre for Computational Law (“CCLAW“), Singapore’s first and only research centre focused on applied research in the intersection between law and technology.^[1]

Two distinguished speakers, Professor Lee Pey Woan, Dean of Yong Pung How School of Law (“YPHSL“), and Mr Yeong Zee Kin, Chief Executive of Singapore Academy of Law (“SAL“), delivered the opening keynote addresses of CLAWCON 2023. This article summarises both of these keynote speeches.

The Landscape of AI Regulation in the Asia-Pacific

By Josh Lee

On 13th May 2024

In Artificial Intelligence, Policy, Regulations

Reading time: 32 minutes

Written by Alistair Simmons and Matthew Rostick | Edited by Josh Lee Kok Thong

Introduction

In recent months, many jurisdictions in the Asia-Pacific (“APAC”) have adopted or are considering various forms of AI governance mechanisms. At least 16 jurisdictions in APAC have begun some form of AI governance, and this number will likely continue to increase. This paper scans the different AI governance mechanisms across a number of APAC jurisdictions and offers some observations at the end.

This paper segments AI governance mechanisms into four categories: Direct AI regulations are enforceable rules that regulate the development, deployment or use of AI directly as a technology, and consequently have regulatory impact across multiple sectors. Voluntary frameworks cover voluntary and non-binding guidance issued by governmental entities that directly address the development, deployment or use of AI as a technology. Indirect regulations (data & IP) are also enforceable legal rules but do not regulate the development, deployment or use of AI directly as a technology. They are rules of more general applicability that nevertheless have an impact on the development, deployment or use of AI. As the scope of this category is potentially broad, we have focused on data protection/privacy and intellectual property laws in this paper. Sector-specific measures refers to binding and non-binding rules and guidelines issued by sector regulators that are relevant to the development, deployment or use of AI in an industry. To avoid getting bogged down in the specifics of whether the rules and guidelines are technically binding or not, we have presented them together. Unlike the mechanisms addressed in the Sectoral Governance Mechanisms segment, the non-binding frameworks in this segment typically address the use of AI across multiple sectors.

For avoidance of doubt, this paper addresses legal governance mechanisms only. There may be other initiatives afoot to drive alignment and good practices from a technical perspective. We do not seek to address technical measures in this paper.