Does the idea they put forward reflect the approach to the regulation of IT law in the past 30 years?

Response Paper
The response paper is worth 50% of the IT Law module mark and is based on the following piece:

The Anh Han, Luís Moniz Pereira, and Tom Lenaerts ‘AI developers often ignore safety in the pursuit of a breakthrough – so how do we regulate them without blocking progress?’ The Conversation (18 March 2021).
The word limit is 1500 words excluding footnote references (see penalties below). Footnotes can only be used for bibliographical references and minor, incidental points. They cannot be used to discuss a substantive point that should form part of the main text.

Guidance on structure and approach

To prepare your response, think about the following questions: is the regulatory approach they propose novel? Does the idea they put forward reflect the approach to the regulation of IT law in the past 30 years? Is the idea they suggest desirable and if so, is it viable? How does the authors’ regulatory idea compare to current approaches to AI (eg the AI Act, the Bletchley Declaration, etc) and related regulation?

This piece gives you great latitude. Depending on the questions that resonate most with you, you can respond based on a range of arguments and related evidence: the experience afforded by over thirty years of regulation of ITs; IT law theory (think to pace!); international initiatives on AI; the EU approach to EU enshrined in the draft AI Act; etc.