4 AI insights for executives, corporate boards

Ai in the Boardroom Cornell Keynote. Clockwise from left: Partners at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP James Hu, Angela Dunning, Chase Kaniecki, Lillian Tsu, Benet O’Reilly and D. Bruce Hoffman.

Understanding AI’s impact and ensuring its responsible implementation is essential for board members and senior executives looking to stay ahead in today’s fast-evolving corporate landscape. In a Cornell Keynote, legal professionals from Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP shared what top management needs to know about navigating the opportunities and challenges AI brings to the boardroom.

  1. Navigating intellectual property (IP) challenges.

Many generative AI tools feature a public-facing platform in which users enter text prompts to generate new works, such as text, images or songs. However, because these AI models are trained on extensive datasets, often sourced from the internet, AI may create outputs based on copyrighted material.

There are currently around two dozen IP litigation cases in the United States concerning the training and output of generative AI models, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Imagen. “The key question is whether courts will find that the training of these models was fair use or infringing,” explained Angela Dunning, a partner who focuses on commercial litigation.

If the courts rule that AI training methods are not fair use, the development of these tools could change significantly, potentially affecting their availability and competitiveness, especially in the international market.

“The United States Copyright Office has taken the position that AI-generated outputs are not protected under U.S. copyright law because they are not authored by a human,” said Dunning. “This is now in conflict with some jurisdictions around the world, such as the EU’s AI ACT, which may impose restrictions on the use of copyrighted content for AI training and apply them to AI models globally if their output comes into Europe.”

As companies increasingly incorporate AI technology into their workplaces, board members should ensure that their companies have robust policies in place to mitigate IP risks, such as obtaining proper licenses for training data and regularly reviewing compliance with evolving laws. Proactively addressing these challenges can help protect the company’s innovations and preserve its competitive advantage in the market.

  1. Addressing SEC disclosure requirements.

Erik Gerding, director of the SEC Division of Corporate Finance, recently released a statement signaling AI as a disclosure priority for the SEC and compelling companies to be as detailed as possible in their annual reports, including identifying how the company defines AI and how the technology could benefit the company’s operational outcomes, financial condition and growth potential.

Specificity is crucial for general counsels and legal teams submitting AI disclosures to the SEC. “The SEC is focused on making sure that disclosures public companies make on AI and the opportunities it presents are tailored to that company rather than being a generic boilerplate disclosure,” noted Lillian Tsu, a partner specializing in securities and capital markets transactions.

Tsu also highlights the importance of attending to the material risks of AI technology, as the data that AI generates are predictions, not conclusions. “In other words, the disclosure should not be divorced from what is happening in reality,” added James Hu, a partner who focuses on merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions.

By adhering to these guidelines, companies not only comply with SEC requirements but also foster greater transparency and trust with stakeholders. Comprehensive and tailored AI disclosures reflect a company’s commitment to responsible innovation, offering a clear view of how AI integration aligns with the company’s strategic goals and risk management practices. 

  1. Understanding antitrust implications.

According to D. Bruce Hoffman, a partner whose practice focuses on antitrust enforcement, AI introduces four significant issues on the antitrust front: the use of AI for collusion, unilateral conduct, mergers and compliance with the Robinson-Patman Act.

The use of AI for collusion has garnered the most attention from antitrust enforcers such as the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission due to concerns that AI systems could enable competitors to coordinate pricing or other market behaviors. 

“The Department of Justice has drawn an analogy stating that AI, in this context, is no different from a person. If competing companies were to send their cost data to this person who then instructed them to charge the same price, that would constitute collusion. This can potentially lead to antitrust trouble as well as exposure to civil problems,” said Hoffman.

Another issue is the role of AI in unilateral conduct, particularly in monopolization cases. AI systems could make decisions that, while rational, could be seen as anticompetitive if they harm competitors in ways that violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The challenge for antitrust enforcers will be determining when an AI’s autonomous actions cross the line from aggressive competition to unlawful conduct.

  1. Leveraging AI in M&A.

AI is quickly becoming a driver of M&A activities as companies look to strengthen their competitive edge. Benet J. O’Reilly, a partner specializing in mergers and acquisitions, notes that AI is a hot investment area, with firms either developing AI in-house or acquiring third-party tools to integrate into their operations.

This surge in AI-driven M&A is fueled by the need to stay ahead in a rapidly evolving technological landscape. Companies are not only seeking innovative technologies but also the talent and expertise behind them. “Talent acquisitions are crucial because they not only bring valuable technology in-house but also prevent that talent from being available to competitors,” explained O’Reilly.

However, integrating these AI-focused teams into larger, more traditional organizations can be challenging. Companies must strike a balance between maintaining the creativity and agility of these teams while aligning them with broader corporate objectives — a process requires careful planning and a willingness to adapt. 

As AI reshapes industries, M&A deals may become more prevalent, with companies increasingly turning to strategic acquisitions to build out their AI capabilities. For executives, understanding the complexities of these transactions will be crucial.

 

For more insights on approaching AI-related developments in the boardroom, experience the full Keynote “Artificial Intelligence in the Boardroom: What Board and Senior Executives Need To Know” on the eCornell website. 

This Keynote is part of  a series of discussions leading up to eCornell’s 2025 Board of Directors Forum. Register now for the opportunity to network and share best practices on cybersecurity, supply chains, data and AI, and earn a Cornell Tech Board of Directors Forum certificate from Cornell Tech.

 

Photo: Clockwise from left: Partners at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP James Hu, Angela Dunning, Chase Kaniecki, Lillian Tsu, Benet O’Reilly and D. Bruce Hoffman.

Leaders examine global economic risks in International Business Law certificate program

Gavel in foreground, world map in background.

From repeat wholesale international transactions to the one-time hire of a consultant abroad, companies of all sizes must now understand the liabilities they might take on during global business operations. Celia Bigoness, a clinical professor at the Cornell Law School and director of the Blassberg-Rice Center for Entrepreneurship Law, developed eCornell’s International Business Law certificate to help professionals understand and mitigate business risks. Bigoness recently discussed her online certificate with the eCornell team.

Why would a ‘domestic business’ need an understanding of international law?

“We tried to make sure that this course would be relevant for a whole variety of companies and individuals, including many who may not think they are necessarily involved in cross-border transactions. So, for example, there’s a module on dealing with tariffs — you could be in a company that thinks that what they do is purely domestic, but the [company] may import products or be looking to import products in the future. There could be cost implications there, and they [need to] understand how to deal with tariffs.”

What tools can businesses use to protect themselves from liability?

“Professionals should be able to look at a particular business strategy or a particular question or set of facts and be able to identify the red flags there, to be able to ask: How is [hiring a consultant in Venezuela] different from hiring a consultant in New York state? What are the risks that a business takes on when it is operating outside of its home environment? And how can that business begin to identify those risks, prioritize them and figure out which risks are acceptable and which risks are not. And then, as a practical matter, once you’ve said the risks are not acceptable, ask ‘what do we do about it?’ That’s where we get into a specific sort of contract techniques and other ways outside of a contract in which a business can protect itself. For example, getting insurance against a specific foreign risk.”

How does the course respond to an evolving geopolitical world?

“We rely heavily on a case study method … and we focus particularly on political risks. What if you are doing business in a country that has a change in leadership which is hostile to working with Americans, or, more broadly, more hostile to working with foreign investors. [The government] may decide that it wants to take action against foreign investors, and that action could be everything ranging from expropriation at the most extreme level to something that is much more common, such as raising taxes or saying you can no longer send American workers. What do you do? What rights do you have as a U.S. business when a foreign government seeks to put pressure on you?

Gain the tools to understand your business’ place in the increasingly globalized world in the International Business Law certificate program from Cornell. Learn more and enroll now.

Quotes have been edited for length and clarity.

Cornell Keynotes podcast: AI today – laws, ethics and protecting your work

Abstract multi-colored objects on blue background

Understanding the ethical and legal use of AI is important for any business. In a new episode of the Cornell Keynotes podcast from eCornell and the fourth installment of the “Generative AI” series, Cornell Tech professor Karan Girotra pairs up with professor Frank Pasquale from Cornell Law School to discuss the laws and ethics of generative AI while looking at performance guarantees as well as unintended consequences and outcomes.

The conversation highlights how organizations in finance, health, education, media and manufacturing are using these technologies in clever ways and charts a path for the next generation of use cases — ones that go beyond using assistants to enhance individual productivity.

Read more on the Chronicle.

Cornell online certificate trains leaders in health care compliance

A wooden gavel and a metal stethoscope lying side by side on an open book with visible text on the pages.

Critical decisions are made every second in health care, each undertaken with layers of both medical and legal considerations. A health care compliance plan gives providers guidance and processes to meet regulations and ethical standards.

Kristen Underhill, a professor of law and associate dean for faculty research at Cornell Law School, began her journey in public health research in 2004 and transitioned into law by 2011. With a robust understanding of the U.S. health care system and a keen understanding of torts and public health law, Underhill transfers her unique expertise to learners in the Healthcare Law certificate program from eCornell.

“The program focuses on domestic health care law, including the application of criminal law, non-discrimination law and data security and protection law,” Underhill said. “The certificate provides a broad overview of the different kinds of organizational obligations that apply to health care facilities.”

Underhill intends to help learners understand that health care professionals, executives, administrators and decision makers need more than just clinical expertise; they must possess an understanding of the legal landscape surrounding them.

This comprehensive program has five courses. In Obligations to Patients, learners investigate informed consent, research with human subjects and the protection of health care information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Each module in the course ends with a real-world scenario, putting the learner in the position of a health care executive or administrator who would identify a problem and take affirmative steps to solve it.

Other courses focus on specific laws such as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which outlines the obligations of emergency departments to screen and stabilize all patients regardless of their ability to pay. Each course immerses learners in authentic scenarios and equips them to approach challenges at health care facilities.

“Health care providers and administrators might not always be thinking about compliance – especially if they have a small practice – but regulation of health care is so thoroughgoing that you cannot operate a patient care organization without understanding the relevant laws,” Underhill said.

In the Healthcare Law certificate program, professionals can acquire the knowledge and skills to ensure every patient receives care that is medically sound, legally grounded and ethical. Learn more and enroll.

Navigating DEI in a Post-Affirmative Action Landscape

Backlash against corporate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives quickly followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to end affirmative action in college admissions. However, a recent poll from The Washington Post and Ipsos found that about 60% of Americans believe DEI programs are “a good thing” for companies to adopt.

In the recent Cornell Keynote webcast “DEI, Affirmative Action and a Politically Polarized Workforce: Where We Are, Where We’re Going and What Employers Should Do,” David Sherwyn, the John and Melissa Ceriale Professor of Hospitality Human Resources at the Cornell Nolan School, hosts Paul Wagner, shareholder and chief financial officer of Stokes Wagner, and Holly Lawson, Noble House Hotels & Resorts’ senior vice president of human resources, for a discussion of the legality and structure of corporate DEI programs.

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to allow mixed-motive discrimination claims. What is mixed-motive discrimination, and how does it pertain to DEI?

Wagner: “The 1991 amendment took the burden of proof from race or another protected class being the sole motivating factor . . . to simply a motivating factor. Congress significantly lowered the bar so that if an employer made an employment decision and was influenced by a nondiscriminatory, nonprotected class-based reason — such as disciplinary action by the employee or something on their resume that caused them not to hire — but the plaintiff could show that race or gender or religion or any other protected class crept into their decision as simply an element, the decision was still unlawful.

Opponents of DEI scrutinize these policies under the same amendment. You can trace today’s backlash to overaggressive DEI policies of employers in the ‘80s, ‘90s and 2000s. Perhaps as written, they were lawful, but as implemented and interpreted by the person in the interviewing room making the decision, if they had a DEI policy that was encouraging the hiring of underrepresented groups, whether it be gender, race, et cetera, they took that and interpreted it as a mission to choose that underrepresented candidate, regardless of how they stacked up against the other candidates.”

Was this law intended to protect against all discrimination or just discrimination directed toward underrepresented groups?

Wagner: “Definitely the latter because if you look at the Civil Rights Movement in the ‘60s and beyond, it was clearly to address [discrimination against Black Americans]. However, the law was not written in a way that said only the groups that had suffered from historic discrimination are actionable plaintiffs and have standing to bring a claim. It protects all of us, whether we’re in a traditionally underrepresented or discriminated against class or not.”

Sherwyn: “I agree with you completely. The purpose of the law is clear. In ‘64, it was a way to open doors previously shut by law, but it was not how it’s being applied in this conversation. The law was written with the goal of a colorblind society, and that’s how it’s applied.”

How do you build a diverse workforce without creating problematic or easily attacked DEI policies?

Lawson: “If you create a program from a place of fear — whether from legal or internal or external backlash — you’re not going to get to the core of the importance of the program. Noble House is a family-led organization within hospitality; within a family, there is inherently a sense of inclusion. We really do feel like our true north is having a culture of inclusion and leaning into that.

Last year, our program was more training-based and discussion-based, whereas this year, it’s more goal-oriented and action-based. We are emphasizing diversity, recruiting and representation at leadership levels, and representation in our partners and vendors. Next year, we want to get to a place where we can measure that action.”

How can HR professionals open doors for more diverse job candidates?

Lawson: “A lot of us within hospitality are focusing more on historically Black colleges and universities and, in general, visiting a larger network of college campuses. There’s also a great organization called Tent, which the founder of Chobani started, that emphasizes assisting refugees and getting them lawfully working in the United States. Labor professionals are thinking, ‘Where were we not looking before? What were we not thinking of? Where were we not going? How can we get amazing talent from those partnerships and opportunities?’ It’s been amazing to see more people and connect with them.”

Are there any legal issues with these recruitment approaches?

Wagner: “As described, no. Opening up your potential sources of applicants to nontraditional sources to attract qualified applicants from those groups is great. However, implementation can be problematic if interviewers give preference to minority applicants to meet diversity goals. An interviewer must take meticulous notes during the recruitment process to prove they expanded opportunities for some underrepresented groups, brought in qualified applicants and ultimately hired the best person among the group.”

How do you respond to the criticism that DEI programs are forms of charity work, and what is the inherent value of these programs?

Lawson: “At Noble House, we’ve focused on the inclusion part to gather the diversity part. We want people to feel included. We want them to tell others about our culture and that they feel included. Naturally and organically, we want these people to bring others in who see themselves represented and continue to contribute to that because it’s the right cause. It creates a higher performing culture, and it’s not for any accolades or pat on the back or to check a box. If that’s your intent and purpose, I think people see through that, and you’re probably going to work backward in your process.”

Wagner: “My point of view is that the culture war scrutiny — mostly from the right — of DEI programs accuses them of being a charity case. That’s the way that group describes them and how it attacks them. But I agree with Holly that these programs have great value, and their goal is to reach out to, attract and ultimately hire qualified candidates from those underrepresented groups. If we do that under a modern DEI program and have the evidence to prove we’ve done it, we’re still okay, despite the accusations from the right saying that this is a charity case or somehow unlawful.”

How can labor professionals ensure that discussions and decisions on DEI initiatives are genuinely inclusive and representative of all communities, especially those historically marginalized?

Lawson: “You have to intentionally allow space for others to speak up and drive DEI programs. At first, we grappled with whether to ask certain individuals to make it very specifically diverse. In some cases, we have; in others, we’ve said let people speak up. We’ve intentionally created some space and drew some people in that we wanted their voices to be heard. I think the success of your program hinges on having a representation of the voices that champion this message.”

How do you ensure that employee resource groups (ERGs) promote inclusivity rather than exclusivity within an organization?

Wagner: “If you allow self-determination among employees to create ERGs and become exclusive, that leads to a lot of problems. I’ve seen a lot of very informal ERG policies at many of my clients’ companies and some that are structured. I like the ones that are more structured and intentional by the employer so that you are driving for maximum inclusivity. The groups can be specialized when it comes to certain things, like people who are interested in the safety committee.

But when it comes to these issues of DEI, I’d recommend and much prefer an ERG where inclusivity of anyone in the workforce is the principal maxim. I think you have to really look at it with a critical eye of how is this going to support my DEI program, how is this going to support my culture, and most importantly, how am I going to get my employees to feel good about it? We want them to participate in a positive way and not see this as a series of little exclusive country clubs.”

What does the forecast for DEI programming and affirmative action look like for the near future?

Lawson: “It’s really important to allow different voices with different perspectives to guide DEI conversations. I don’t know what our DEI programming will look like two years down the road because I want our actions to guide that. I want to hear from other people what’s working and what sticks and let that guide our next step. I don’t want to be marred down by the polarized world we live in where you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t, but rather continue to move forward and progress our policies without fear or concern.”

Wagner: “Traditional affirmative action means to go out and hire on the basis of a protected class to meet your goals or to redress past harms. Going forward, though, I predict that the executive order administered by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs will be deemed unconstitutional. I would encourage employers to focus instead on DEI programs because, if designed correctly and monitored and implemented well, you’re going to continue to withstand the scrutiny and win lawsuits or hopefully avoid them. As much as there are forces from the right in these culture wars attacking these programs, there are forces in favor of diversity and a multicultural society. For instance, look at all of the gender pay equity laws that are cropping up all around the country. I want to make sure that my clients who want to achieve those diversity goals withstand the scrutiny and win at the game because it is a game worth winning.”

To learn more about creating an inclusive work environment, explore Cornell’s HR in Hospitality, Hospitality Labor and Employment Law or Business Law programs — all authored by David Sherwyn — or one of our Diversity & Inclusion certificate programs.

This Q&A has been edited for length and clarity. Experience the full Keynote for “DEI, Affirmative Action and a Politically Polarized Workforce” on the eCornell website.

Cornell Board of Directors Forum set for October in NYC

Cornell live immersion program participants engage in discussion

From geopolitical instability to artificial intelligence (AI), companies are facing an increasingly complex business environment that presents both challenges and strategic opportunities. Following the success of last year’s program, the 2024 Cornell Tech Board of Directors Forum – slated for Oct. 29 and 30 in New York City – is designed to provide corporate leaders with critical skills and actionable insights to bring to their boardrooms.

According to LizAnn Eisen, faculty director for the forum and acting professor of the practice at Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech, the program will cover cutting-edge governance issues and research, delivering leading-edge frameworks and best practices for addressing critical issues.

Read more on the Chronicle.

Cornell Keynotes podcast: Are noncompetes really dead?

Professor Stewart Schwab discusses Robert Katzmann's book "Judging Statutes" at a 2016 Book Talk.

When the Federal Trade Commission’s recent ruling takes effect in September, noncompete agreements will be over. Or will they?

In a new episode of the Cornell Keynotes podcast from eCornell, Cornell Law School professor Stewart J. Schwab and host Chris Wofford discuss the history of noncompetes and why the FTC might not have the final say.

The FTC estimates that one in five American employees are bound by noncompete agreements that impose time or location restrictions on their ability to pursue work with or create competitor companies. In April, the FTC issued a rule banning noncompetes with the intent to “generate over 8,500 new businesses each year, raise worker wages, lower health care costs and boost innovation.”

Will a court issue an injunction against the rule? Does the FTC even have the power to make the call on noncompetes?

Listen to Episode 34: “Are Noncompetes Really Dead?” and read more on the Chronicle.

Cornell Keynotes podcast: The American South braces for a huge unionization push

Auto worker using tools on metal car parts

Will auto industry unionization in Tennessee and Alabama galvanize a new labor movement in the South?

In a new episode of the Cornell Keynotes podcast from eCornell, Andrew Wolf, a professor of global labor and work at Cornell’s ILR School, joins host Chris Wofford to discuss the opportunities and challenges ahead for both auto manufacturing companies and labor organizers.

Unionization is shaking up the auto industry, delivering meaningful gains toward fair pay and other benefits for workers in the U.S. The efforts are particularly significant in the South where a legacy of racist labor laws continues to propagate disparity within the workforce.

Listen to Episode 32: “The American South Braces for a Huge Unionization Push” and read more on the Chronicle.

Cornell launches new general counsel executive education program

Cornell Tech campus

Senior in-house attorneys and corporate leaders are navigating a dynamic business environment full of opportunities and challenges, ranging from technological innovation to shifts in regulatory requirements. At the current pace of change, 45 percent of chief executives believe their businesses could fail within a decade unless they adapt.

Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech are set to host the General Counsel Summit – an immersive executive education program designed to help these professionals address new issues in corporate governance and compliance, intellectual property, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, sustainability, ethics and more – on June 20 and 21, 2024, at Cornell Tech in New York City.

“It is imperative for in-house counsel to be on the cutting edge of business transformation,” said LizAnn Eisen, faculty director for the summit and acting professor of the practice at Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech. “These legal practitioners are pivotal in guiding companies through rapid global change. Our program is designed to help participants position themselves as strategic thought leaders and partners to executives in organizations working to capitalize on trends and avoid common pitfalls.”

The summit is structured to deliver valuable insights and practical knowledge in a variety of formats. Participants will engage in online and in-person presentations, panel discussions and hands-on workshops led by Eisen and other Cornell faculty experts, experienced corporate lawyers and decision makers, including:

  • Charles Whitehead, B.A. ’83, Professor, Cornell Law School
  • Matthew D’Amore, B.S. ’91, Associate Dean, Cornell Tech
  • C. Allen Parker, Former CEO, SVP & General Counsel, Wells Fargo
  • René Paula, Multi-Exit Executive, Public Company Officer, Board Director, Vaxxinity
  • Danielle Sheer, Chief Legal & Compliance Officer, Commvault
  • Nicholas Dorsey, J.D. ’09, Partner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
  • Elizabeth Morgan, Partner, King & Spalding
  • Michael Arnold, Partner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
  • Bill Priestap, Founder, Trenchcoat Advisors
  • ​​Alasdair Share, Chief Security Officer, Goldman Sachs
  • Machua Millett, Chief Innovation Officer, Lockton Financial Services
  • Margaux Knee, Chief Administrative Officer, LinkNYC
  • Susan Meisel, Executive Vice President, Sony Music Entertainment
  • Elizabeth Grayer, Non-Profit Executive and Attorney

Participants will also enjoy peer networking receptions. Eisen believes the program’s small size of no more than 50 professionals will enable productive one-to-one conversations on best practices and strategy during those gatherings.

“The significant changes sweeping through the corporate landscape demand a nuanced understanding of how areas such as technology, geopolitics, risk and crisis management intersect with the law,” Eisen said. “Following the summit, members of the cohort will return to their companies as stronger communicators, problem solvers and influencers on these topics. They will also gain an expanded network of fellow leaders to consult in challenging times.”

Participants who complete the program will earn the General Counsel Summit: Strategic Leadership Certificate from Cornell Tech, CLE credit and 25 Professional Development Hours.

Individuals interested in the program can learn more and register online through June 10. Early bird pricing is available for a limited time.