Position Paper: If Innovation in AI Systematically Violates Fundamental Rights, Is It Innovation at All?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.00027v1
• Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2025 12:45:53 GMT
• Title: Position Paper: If Innovation in AI Systematically Violates Fundamental Rights, Is It Innovation at All?
• Authors: Josu Eguiluz Castañeira, Axel Brando, Migle Laukyte, Marc Serra-Vidal,
• Abstract summary: This position paper challenges the entrenched belief that regulation and innovation are opposites.<n>The absence of well-designed regulation has already created immeasurable damage.<n> Regulation, when thoughtful and adaptive, is not a brake on innovation -- it is its foundation.
• Score: 1.9007927541638245
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) now permeates critical infrastructures and decision-making systems where failures produce social, economic, and democratic harm. This position paper challenges the entrenched belief that regulation and innovation are opposites. As evidenced by analogies from aviation, pharmaceuticals, and welfare systems and recent cases of synthetic misinformation, bias and unaccountable decision-making, the absence of well-designed regulation has already created immeasurable damage. Regulation, when thoughtful and adaptive, is not a brake on innovation -- it is its foundation. The present position paper examines the EU AI Act as a model of risk-based, responsibility-driven regulation that addresses the Collingridge Dilemma: acting early enough to prevent harm, yet flexibly enough to sustain innovation. Its adaptive mechanisms -- regulatory sandboxes, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) support, real-world testing, fundamental rights impact assessment (FRIA) -- demonstrate how regulation can accelerate responsibly, rather than delay, technological progress. The position paper summarises how governance tools transform perceived burdens into tangible advantages: legal certainty, consumer trust, and ethical competitiveness. Ultimately, the paper reframes progress: innovation and regulation advance together. By embedding transparency, impact assessments, accountability, and AI literacy into design and deployment, the EU framework defines what responsible innovation truly means -- technological ambition disciplined by democratic values and fundamental rights.

Related papers

• Pluralism in AI Governance: Toward Sociotechnical Alignment and Normative Coherence [0.16921396880325779]
  The study synthesises frameworks including Full-Stack Alignment, Thick Models of Value, Value Sensitive Design, and Public Constitutional AI.<n>It introduces a layered framework linking values, mechanisms, and strategies, and maps tensions such as fairness versus efficiency, transparency versus security, and privacy versus equity.<n>The study contributes a holistic, value-sensitive model of AI governance, reframing regulation as a proactive mechanism for embedding public values into sociotechnical systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T14:28:56Z)
• Who Owns the Knowledge? Copyright, GenAI, and the Future of Academic Publishing [0.0]
  The integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and large language models (LLMs) into scientific research and higher education presents a paradigm shift.<n>This study examines the complex intersection of AI and science, with a specific focus on the challenges posed to copyright law and the principles of open science.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-24T10:34:38Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• AI Regulation and Capitalist Growth: Balancing Innovation, Ethics, and Global Governance [0.0]
  Do rules and oversight bolster long term growth by building trust and safeguarding the public, or do they constrain innovation and free enterprise?<n>This paper examines the balance between AI regulation and capitalist ideals, focusing on how different approaches to AI data privacy can impact innovation in AI-driven applications.<n>Our analysis synthesizes historical precedents, the current U.S. regulatory landscape, economic projections, legal challenges, and case studies of recent AI policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T10:59:02Z)
• Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems.<n>Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• The Artificial Intelligence Act: critical overview [0.0]
  This article provides a critical overview of the recently approved Artificial Intelligence Act. It starts by presenting the main structure, objectives, and approach of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. The text concludes that even if the overall framework can be deemed adequate and balanced, the approach is so complex that it risks defeating its own purpose.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T21:38:02Z)
• The Dual Imperative: Innovation and Regulation in the AI Era [0.0]
  This article addresses the societal costs associated with the lack of regulation in Artificial Intelligence.<n>Over fifty years of AI research, have propelled AI into the mainstream, promising significant economic benefits.<n>The discourse is polarized between accelerationists, advocating for unfettered technological advancement, and doomers, calling for a slowdown to prevent dystopian outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T08:26:25Z)
• Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
  "Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture. This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias. In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Assessing the impact of regulations and standards on innovation in the field of AI [0.0]
  This paper critically examines the idea that regulation stifles innovation in the field of AI. Current trends in AI regulation and the standards supporting its implementation are discussed. Arguments in support of the idea that regulation stifles innovation are analysed and criticised.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T15:04:57Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.