Compliance Stuff

A California appellate court recently affirmed a jury verdict awarding $4 million to a police captain who was subjected to a hostile work environment after a sexually explicit, AI-generated image resembling her was widely circulated in the workplace, holding that the dissemination of such fabricated content constituted unlawful harassment under California law. In a separate case, a Washington State trooper filed suit alleging that a supervisor used AI to create and circulate a deepfake video of him intimately kissing a coworker; the officer is suing his employer for discrimination, retaliation, and invasion of privacy. These high-profile incidents highlight a disturbing trend: AI-generated content—especially deepfakes—is emerging as a powerful new form of workplace harassment.  As AI tools become more accessible and ubiquitous in the workplace, employers should prepare for the possibility that deepfake content could be weaponized to humiliate, retaliate against, or intimidate col...

Artificial intelligence has become commonplace in recruiting, screening, interviewing, testing, promotion, and employee monitoring. Properly designed and governed, AI can streamline processes and improve consistency . However, in employment decision-making, AI can introduce legal and operational risks for the employer, even when the AI tools are built and operated by third-party vendors. Businesses should understand where and when liabilities may arise and use vendor contracts to mitigate and allocate those risks before deploying AI as part of employment decisions. Legal Risks in Using AI for Employment Decisions A legal risk in using AI as part of employment decisions is that AI tools can encode or amplify historical bias . Disparate treatment claims can arise where systems use or infer protected characteristics such as age, race, religion, sex, disability, or genetic information—either directly or through proxies like geography or graduation dates. Disparate impact claims can follow ...