Jump to content

AI Law Wiki News for September 26, 2026

From AI Law Wiki

AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.

FTC chair says agent developers could face liability for instructed conduct

At a Reuters event in Austin on September 25, Federal Trade Commission Chair Andrew Ferguson said he would resist treating AI agents as independent actors when considering responsibility for their conduct. Reuters reported that he suggested developers who instruct agents could be liable for resulting harm and said existing legal tools, including the FTC's data-breach authority, may apply to AI developers. His comments point to the use of existing consumer-protection powers in future AI-agent oversight.[1]

First published on the wiki September 26, 2026; edition date September 26, 2026; remarks made September 25, 2026.

On September 23, OpenAI and Microsoft asked the Southern District of New York to strike a supplemental expert report and parts of the authors’ summary-judgment submission that rely on a study of whether AI-generated books dilute the market for human-authored books. In their motion, the defendants allege that class counsel funded the research and introduced it after expert-disclosure deadlines without adequately disclosing that funding. The court has not ruled on the request. The dispute concerns evidence offered on market harm, a central factor in the litigation’s fair-use arguments. See In re OpenAI, Inc., Copyright Infringement Litigation.[2][3]

First published on the wiki September 26, 2026; edition date September 26, 2026; motion filed September 23, 2026.

Lawmakers renew federal biometric-surveillance moratorium proposal

On September 25, Senator Ed Markey, Senator Jeff Merkley and House sponsors announced a renewed proposal for the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act of 2026. The draft would restrict federal agencies' use of face and other biometric surveillance unless Congress specifically authorizes it. It would also condition Byrne public-safety grants to states and localities on comparable restrictions, and permit civil and state-attorney-general enforcement. The sponsors' announcement puts federal biometric surveillance and grant conditions back before Congress.[4][5]

First published on the wiki September 26, 2026; edition date September 26, 2026; proposal announced September 25, 2026.

Brazil issues AI research-ethics guidance for studies involving people

Brazil’s National Instance of Research Ethics (INAEP) published version 1.0 of its guidance for ethical review of human-subject research involving AI on September 25. The guide asks researchers and ethics committees to assess the system’s actual use and risks to participants and affected groups, including data handling, bias, validation and effective human oversight. It recommends that protocols disclose material AI use and describe who checks its output. The guidance supports review under Brazil’s existing research-ethics framework; committees retain the decision. The publication gives researchers and reviewers a common set of questions for evaluating AI-assisted studies.[6][7]

First published on the wiki September 26, 2026; edition date September 26, 2026; guide published September 25, 2026.

References