Can AI be Consentful?
Giada Pistilli, Bruna Trevelin

TL;DR
This paper critically examines the limitations of traditional consent frameworks in the context of generative AI, highlighting a 'consent gap' and proposing the need for evolved legal and ethical approaches to address AI's unique challenges.
Contribution
It identifies fundamental challenges to consent in AI, such as scope, temporality, and autonomy, and analyzes how current frameworks are insufficient to protect individual rights.
Findings
Legal frameworks inadequately address AI consent challenges
Identifies three core problems: scope, temporality, autonomy
Highlights need for evolving ethical and legal approaches
Abstract
The evolution of generative AI systems exposes the challenges of traditional legal and ethical frameworks built around consent. This chapter examines how the conventional notion of consent, while fundamental to data protection and privacy rights, proves insufficient in addressing the implications of AI-generated content derived from personal data. Through legal and ethical analysis, we show that while individuals can consent to the initial use of their data for AI training, they cannot meaningfully consent to the numerous potential outputs their data might enable or the extent to which the output is used or distributed. We identify three fundamental challenges: the scope problem, the temporality problem, and the autonomy trap, which collectively create what we term a ''consent gap'' in AI systems and their surrounding ecosystem. We argue that current legal frameworks inadequately…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics and Social Impacts of AI · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
