Regulating

Editorial

Welcome to the third and final Issue of 2019 of the European Journal of Law and Technology. In this Issue, we present three original and thought provoking research articles on the broad theme of regulation.

In our first article titled 'Regulating AI and Machine Learning: Setting the Regulatory Agenda', Julia Black and Andrew Murray examine the regulation of AI and machine leaning. Drawing lessons from history and looking back at debates on internet regulation, the authors propose a framework for designing regulatory systems, 'for analysing deep-rooted causes of failures, for thinking through the potential impacts of changes in any part of the system, and for helping us understand how each element would need to operate and be accountable if regulation of AI is to be both effective and trusted'. The article undoubtedly makes a very pleasing and timely contribution to the debates and scholarship in this area.

Jennifer Cobbe and Jatinder Singh in their article 'Regulating Recommending: Motivations, Considerations, and Principles' offer novel and insightful perspectives on the fairly contentious issue of platform liability. Whilst content hosting itself has been the subject of scholarship and debates, relatively little has been said about regulating the mechanisms by which platforms recommend content. The authors point out that recommending content is not one of the three activities envisaged by the E-commerce Directive in terms of the liability protections, and they propose solutions and principles for future regulation to address this gap in the law.

In our final article of the year titled 'Regulating Initial Coin Offerings and Cryptocurrencies: A Comparison of Different Approaches in Nine Jurisdictions Worldwide', Bart Custers and Lara Overwater examine the regulatory responses to cryptocurrencies and Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) in various jurisdictions. Identifying the differences in approach to regulation within these selected jurisdictions, the authors point out that a 'positive and facilitating approach' is more desirable than the 'negative, forbidden approach' adopted by certain countries. The authors remind us of the need for clear and detailed legislative and regulatory framework for the former approach to be successful, including provisions to address money-laundering, cybercrime, protection for consumers and investors, and clarity for tax liability.

I would like to thank all our contributors, reviewers and readers for your continuing support for the EJLT. We wish everyone a very happy and prosperous New Year.

Abhilash Nair

December 2019