Artificial Intelligence

On 23 February 2026, the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC), together with 60 other national data protection authorities, published a joint statement on AI-generated images and the protection of privacy. In it, the data protection authorities formulate their most important expectations and principles for all organisations that develop and use AI systems to generate content. These include, in particular, robust safeguards against misuse, transparency requirements, effective and accessible erasure mechanisms and specific child protection.

Access control via facial scanning, age classification in e-commerce, voice recognition in customer service, or emotion analysis in video calls – there are many applications for biometric systems in business practice. Artificial intelligence (AI) makes many of these systems better, faster, and more effective. But the use of AI with biometric data not only raises concerns among data protectionists – against the backdrop of the AI Regulation (AI-VO), many companies are asking themselves: Which biometric applications are prohibited under the AI-VO, which are considered high-risk, and when do "only" transparency obligations apply?

A landmark ruling by the High Court in London in the Getty Images v. Stability AI case has drawn clear boundaries for trademark and copyright laws in relation to AI image generators. Find out here what consequences this ruling has for rights holders and developers in Switzerland and which questions remain unanswered.

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court (BVGer) has issued a landmark ruling: Artificial intelligence cannot be registered as the inventor of a patent. Only natural persons can claim this status—provided they have participated in the AI process, recognized the invention, and submitted the application. The FAC is thus setting a clear standard for AI-supported innovations—with far-reaching consequences for companies, patent strategies, and future legal developments.

The Hamburg Regional Court, in the so-called Laion case, has become the first German court to rule on whether copyright is infringed when training artificial intelligence (AI). It has dismissed the lawsuit of a photographer, ruling that the use of his photo is justified under the text and data mining exception outlined in § 60d of the German Copyright Act (UrhG).

Digitalisation and, in particular, the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) pose new challenges for copyright law. On 11 November 2025, the 42nd Civil Chamber of the Regional Court of Munich I, which specialises in copyright law, issued a landmark ruling in the case "GEMA v. OpenAI". It thus strengthens the position of authors vis-à-vis AI providers and obliges OpenAI to cease and desist and potentially pay damages for the use of copyrighted song lyrics in the training and operation of its language models. The judgement is not legally binding, but has a signal effect for the entire industry

With the recently launched consultation procedure on the new Federal Act on Communication Platforms and Search Engines, the Federal Council aims to require major online platforms and search engines such as Google, Facebook, TikTok and X to ensure greater fairness, transparency and user rights. Users are to be better protected in the future—from reporting and complaint procedures to clear information requirements and greater data and advertising transparency. This is a historic step toward regulating digital infrastructure in Switzerland.

Access to the EU single market opens up great opportunities for Swiss companies, but it also brings with it a multitude of regulatory requirements. Whether it's product safety, CE marking, data protection (GDPR), artificial intelligence (AI), sustainability reports (ESG) or industry-specific guidelines: anyone who wants to operate in the EU needs to know which regulations apply.

What previously required extensive studies and years (if not decades) of research has now become reality within a very short time: artificial intelligence (AI) has independently developed a new antibiotic against multi-resistant germs, without any human assistance or lengthy clinical trials. The media response in medical research was correspondingly huge. Is this a turning point in research?