Episode Details

Federal doctrine across copyright, institutional free speech, and Title VII embeds human-scale predicates, Human Creativity, Observational Capacity, and Attributable Agency, that operate as invisible structural conditions the law never had to name. When AI displaces them, enacted doctrine loses coherence without a word of the statute changing. Jim Ko, Founder of the AI Rights Project, terms this silent recalibration and presents the Human Baseline framework as the interpretive discipline required to address it. The framework surfaces across three doctrinal areas: Copyright: Machine-scale ingestion of billions of works is treated as equivalent to human reading, without examining whether the Human Creativity predicate survives. Institutional free speech: Platforms claim First Amendment editorial discretion for algorithmic curation while simultaneously disclaiming accountability for the content that curation produces. Title VII: AI hiring systems displace Observational Capacity and Attributable Agency simultaneously, generating operative criteria no human specified and no human can validate. Attendees leave with an interpretive tool that identifies when predicate displacement has occurred, forces courts and clients to confront who has authority to recalibrate it, and insists on congressional or constitutional authorization before doctrine bends to the technology, a discipline applicable across any practice area where AI has entered the picture. Audio versions of Beverly Hills Bar Association programs are eligible for Self-Study CLE credit in California. Visit www.bhba.org/podcasts for more information.