Hunton Retail Law Resource

The FTC has settled a case with a company operating an artificial intelligence-enabled “writing assistant” service. Among the use cases Rytr LLC offered was one that would craft testimonials and reviews, allowing users to select desired tone (e.g., “formal,” “funny,” “convincing”), keywords and phrases, level of creativity (e.g., “optimal,” “high,” “max”), and the number of reviews sought. Based on this user input, Rytr’s AI service would then generate genuine-sounding, detailed reviews quickly and with little user effort.

In February, we posted about the USPTO’s Inventorship Guidance for AI-assisted Inventions, 89 Fed. Reg. 10043 (Feb. 13, 2024), and how that guidance might affect a retailer in New USPTO AI-Assisted Invention Guidance Will Affect Retailers and Consumer Goods Companies.

What if courts used artificial intelligence (AI) to determine the plain meaning of undefined terms, including terms in insurance policies? Eleventh Circuit Judge Newsom ponders that very question in his concurring opinion in Snell v. United Specialty Insurance Company, decided May 28, 2024. In a recent Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog post discussing the intersection of AI and insurance, insurance coverage partner Michael S. Levine and associate Alex D. Pappas unpack Judge Newsom’s concurring opinion. In doing so, they not only discuss the pros and cons of using AI to discern the plain meaning of certain words and phrases, but they discuss whether AI can answer a vexing question on the minds of insurers and policyholders alike: what is AI and how should it be defined?