Desafíos actuales de la Inteligencia Artificial

Analysing the interplay between data spaces and article 10 of the AI act: a case study of ... 75 While there are plenty of regulatory crossroads and tensions at this stage of the EU dig- ital economy, an under-researched area lays in the intersection between the AI Act and the data spaces sectoral regulation. 2 This interplay is quite relevant since Recital 68 AI Act would hint at the possibility of using these data spaces to ensure AI developers a way to access high quality data sets (as the recital points out: “ European common data spaces (…) will be instrumental to provide trustful, accountable and non-discriminatory access to high-quality data for the training, validation and testing of AI systems ”). In this respect, our paper aims to provide a preliminary analysis of Article 10(5) AI Act and how it should be read in conjunction with data spaces proposed regulations. Given the wide range of AI applications and data spaces, our study shall rely on a case study around consumer creditworthiness AI systems, which are categorised by the AI Act as high-risk. 3 The paper is structured as follows. First, we give an overview of the AI Act, with a par- ticular focus on its Article 10(5) (section 2). Next, we discuss the notion and purpose of data spaces as the selected instrument to enable data sharing (section 3). Then, we layout the basis of our case study around creditworthiness AI systems in financial services (section 4), along- side some identified potential clashes between Article 10(5) and the current FiDAR proposal. Based on this, and to ensure the actual utility of Article 10(5), we provide some recommen- dations and conclusions to address the apparent limitations found in data spaces regulatory proposals in the context of the case study (section 5). 2. OVERVIEW OF ARTICLE 10(5) OF THE AI ACT After almost three years since its proposal, the final text of AI Act has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union. 4 The final text reveals a regulatory instrument that its main purpose is to improve the functioning of the internal market, promote the up- take of human-centric and trustworthy artificial intelligence and ensure a high level of pro- tection of health, safety and fundamental rights. 5 It classifies AI systems according to the risks they pose to health, safety and fundamental rights. Those that are classified as high-risk must comply with the requirements established in 2 The only exception is that of healthcare where extensive research has been conducted regarding the impact of the EDHS proposal, as for example based on de Zegher et al. (2024), Biasin, Yasar & Kamenjasevic (2023) or Kiseleva and de Hert (2020). 3 Annex III.5.B AI Act: “AI systems intended to be used to evaluate the creditworthiness of natural persons or establish their credit score (…)”. 4 Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act)Text with EEA relevance PE/24/2024/REV/1 OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj. 5 Article 1 AI Act.