On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union Legislative Acts
CULT-PA-719637
Committee on Culture and Education · Rapporteur: Marcel Kolaja
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
The Committee on Culture and Education's draft opinion responds to the Commission's proposed Artificial Intelligence Act. It welcomes the proposal but asks the lead committees to add high-risk AI uses in education, media and culture to Annex III, and to widen the bans in Article 5.¶¶¶ It proposes listing as high-risk AI that monitors students during tests, determines a student's area of study, creates or spreads machine-generated news articles, and recommends or ranks audiovisual content.¶¶ It would extend the social scoring ban to public and private entities, and ban real-time and post remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces, deleting the law enforcement exceptions.¶¶¶ Other amendments add society and the environment to the regulation's protected interests, broaden the definitions of emotion recognition, biometric categorisation and publicly accessible space, and require the Commission to review Annex III at least every six months.¶¶¶
Committee position. The rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal but proposes amendments to extend the high-risk list in Annex III to education, media and culture, and to modify Article 5 bans on social scoring and remote biometric identification.¶¶¶
Key points
- The rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal but proposes amendments to Annex III and Article 5.¶
- The opinion asks the lead committees to add high-risk AI uses in education, media and culture to Annex III.¶¶
- It proposes listing as high-risk AI that monitors students during tests and AI that determines the area or programme a student should study.¶¶
- It proposes listing as high-risk AI that creates or disseminates machine-generated news articles and AI that recommends or ranks audiovisual content.¶¶
- It proposes extending the ban on social scoring systems to use by public and private entities.¶¶¶
- It proposes banning real-time and post remote biometric identification in publicly accessible places, deleting the law enforcement exceptions.¶¶¶
- It would add society and the environment to the interests the regulation protects, alongside health, safety and fundamental rights.¶¶¶
- It would broaden the definitions of emotion recognition, biometric categorisation and publicly accessible space, including virtual places.¶¶¶
- It would classify non-remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces, workplaces and education and training institutions as high-risk.¶¶
- It would require the Commission to review Annex III at least every six months and consult institutions and stakeholders before adopting delegated acts.¶¶¶
Who is affected
- Education and training institutions: AI used to assign students, assess them, monitor tests or determine study areas would be high-risk.¶¶¶
- News media outlets and audiovisual media services: AI creating machine-generated news or ranking content would be high-risk.¶¶
- Public and private entities: the ban on social scoring systems would apply to both.¶¶¶
- Providers and users of remote biometric identification systems: real-time and post use in publicly accessible places would be banned.¶¶¶
- Employers and platforms: AI for promotion, termination, task allocation and monitoring workplace rules would be high-risk.¶¶