The EU AI Act: Between the rock of product safety and the hard place of fundamental rights

p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"font face="TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT, serif"The European Union (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (the AI Act) sets out a hybrid regulatory framework. The AI Act combines two classic traditions of EU law, namely product safety and fundamental rights protection. However, the proposed combination can fail if it does not account for the structural differences between the two legal traditions. This article uses three classical themes of the law and technology literature – the pacing problem, the regulatory lens, and institutional path dependence – to show why the AI Act’s design creates practical and theoretical challenges that will need to be addressed during the Act’s implementation and in future EU legislation. /font

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Common Market Law Review
Published
2025-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2025004
Citations
19
Primary Topic
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
47.14
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The EU AI Act: Between the rock of product safety and the hard place of fundamental rights

Nicolas Petit, Marco Almada
19 citations
Common Market Law Review
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
47.14
article

The EU AI Act: Between the rock of product safety and the hard place of fundamental rights

Nicolas Petit, Marco Almada
article en
19 citations

Abstract

p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"font face="TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT, serif"The European Union (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (the AI Act) sets out a hybrid regulatory framework. The AI Act combines two classic traditions of EU law, namely product safety and fundamental rights protection. However, the proposed combination can fail if it does not account for the structural differences between the two legal traditions. This article uses three classical themes of the law and technology literature – the pacing problem, the regulatory lens, and institutional path dependence – to show why the AI Act’s design creates practical and theoretical challenges that will need to be addressed during the Act’s implementation and in future EU legislation. /font

Common Market Law ReviewVol. 62(Issue 1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
47.14
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.