AI and Machine Learning
Legal support for AI product companies and AI-forward growth companies operating under federal, state, and international AI rules.
Consilium Law LLC works with AI product companies and growth companies deploying AI in regulated settings. The industry sits across the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, FTC enforcement under Section 5, the EU AI Act, the Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, New York City Local Law 144, and sector-specific rules in health care, hiring, financial services, and consumer protection. Vendor contracting, model oversight, auditability, and board reporting now run alongside product and engineering decisions.
The work covers AI providers, AI deployers, and the corporate, contracting, and governance work that surrounds both.
What legal work does this industry require?
For AI product companies, the legal work concentrates around customer-facing AI terms, training data rights, model risk allocation, and provider-deployer obligation allocation under the EU AI Act. For AI deployers, it concentrates around vendor contracts, deployment-level obligations under state AI laws and the EU AI Act, and the documentation that supports board oversight.
- EU AI Act scope and obligation mapping under Articles 9 through 15.
- NIST AI RMF program review for legal sufficiency.
- State AI law coverage: Colorado SB 205, Illinois HB 3773, NYC Local Law 144, and emerging rules.
- AI vendor and customer contracting, including training data, output rights, and IP indemnity.
- Board-level disclosure and AI governance reporting.
- FTC enforcement posture and Section 5 risk under current and prior guidance.
When does AI governance become a legal issue rather than a policy issue?
The line is crossed when an AI system touches a regulated decision, a regulated dataset, a regulated market, or a contract that changes if the model changes. That usually happens before a company has built a formal AI governance program of its own.
How does the EU AI Act apply to US companies?
The EU AI Act reaches US companies that place AI systems on the EU market or whose AI output is used in the EU. The high-risk obligations under Article 6 and Annex III become enforceable on August 2, 2026. Scope is fact-specific: a US-only product can still fall in scope if its output is used by an EU deployer.
How does this fit alongside the AI Governance Counsel practice?
The industry view describes the regulatory and commercial environment for AI-forward companies. The AI Governance Counsel practice describes the legal work the firm does inside that environment. Most engagements combine both.
Frequently asked questions
Does Consilium Law represent both AI providers and AI deployers?
Yes. The legal posture is different for each, but the work runs from the same body of law. Provider-deployer allocation is one of the more frequently negotiated terms in AI vendor agreements.
What about generative AI specifically?
Generative AI raises a layered set of legal questions across IP, training data, output ownership, disclosure, and content moderation, on top of the standard AI governance work. The practice handles those questions for both providers and deployers.
How does the practice approach state AI laws that are still being drafted?
State AI law is moving quickly. The practice tracks the bills that are likely to become law and flags them on a forward calendar rather than waiting for enforcement. That gives companies time to shape contracts and programs before the obligation becomes immediate.
SparkPoint is where Consilium Law writes about the legal and regulatory changes that touch this work. The current archive includes analysis across AI governance, clean energy, trade and sanctions, M&A, and data privacy.
Read SparkPointStart a conversation.
Send a short note about what you are building and what brought you here. The founding attorney reviews each inquiry personally. If there is a clear conversation to have, you will hear back within one business day with a next step.