By Taylor Richmond | WNPA News Service
Guardrails are needed in the development of artificial intelligence so consumers can have confidence what they see and read on the internet is accurate and real, lawmakers say.
“We need to place those safeguards to ensure that there is accountability,” said Rep. Clyde Shavers, D-Oak Harbor. Shavers is the prime sponsor of two bills, HB 1168 and SHB 1170.
AI systems find patterns in large amounts of data and make predictions based on those patterns. Generative AI can use those predictions to generate text, images, audio and video.
A system is “trained” when it is given data and different datasets have different patterns. HB 1168 would require developers to post the data used to train their AI systems. It is modeled after a bill passed in California last year.
The documentation must list the data’s source or owner and if it is copyrighted, trademarked, patented or in the public domain, if the bill is passed into law. Also relevant is whether it was purchased or licensed by the developer and if it includes personal information.
This way, members of the public could take action if their intellectual property is being used without their permission. The goal is transparency to the public, according to Shavers, while not stifling innovation.
“We are right now at a critical point where we are building the foundational blocks to ensure that artificial intelligence continues to grow,” he said. “At the same time, we’re protecting and ensuring this technology is used to help us.”
Companies are already gathering this information, according to Dr. Jai Jaisimha, affiliate professor at the University of Washington in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. It is a process called “scraping,” where data is extracted as it comes in.
“So, when people scrape, they have to keep track of what they scraped,” said Jaisimha. “You ask any data engineer worth their salt and they’re going tell you, ‘Of course, we keep a record.’”
However, according to Rose Feliciano, who represents a network of tech CEOs called TechNet, the bill could require the release of trade secrets. Rep. Joshua Penner, R-Orting, said this could stifle innovation and proposed a substitution that added trade secret protections, but it was voted down.
Rep. Shelley Kloba, D-Kirkland, voted against the substitution saying it created a “loophole” that would allow companies to hide any data they deemed a trade secret.
The Attorney General’s office is charged with enforcing the provisions of this bill. Fines of $5,000 per day can be levied against developers who are out of compliance.
Many testifiers and legislators said they wanted suggestions from the AI task force created by Gov. Bob Ferguson while he was Attorney General in 2024 before moving forward with a bill. Rep. Stephanie Barnard, R-Pasco, also suggested using California as a test subject since Washington’s bill is so closely aligned with theirs.
“Let’s wait a little while and see how this pans out,” she said. “I don’t know why we have to play catch-up and not even allow those involved to have the same amount of time that those in California had to comply.”
According to Shavers, the goal is transparency, but he understands how complicated the balance between regulation and innovation is. He said HB 1168 will continue to change as they move through the legislative process and he looks forward to continued collaboration with the AI task force and others.
However, it was quickly voted out of the House Technology, Economic Development and Veterans Committee after insistence by committee leader Rep. Cindy Ryu, D-Shoreline.
“I have every intention of passing this bill,” she said during the public hearing for HB 1168. “Do nothing until Congress acts or wait for the task force to come up with their recommendations. Those are not viable options for me.”
The Washington State Journal is a nonprofit news website operated by the WNPA Foundation. To learn more, go to wastatejournal.org.
