The Biden administration's Bureau of Industry and Security has released an Interim Final Rule (IFR) establishing an "Export Control Framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Diffusion." This development has drawn a critical response from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), a prominent think tank focusing on science and technology policy.

Daniel Castro, Vice President of ITIF, expressed concerns about the IFR's impact on U.S. competitiveness and global AI leadership. He warned that pressuring nations to choose between the United States and China could alienate key partners and inadvertently strengthen China's position in the global AI ecosystem. Castro noted that many countries might opt for uninterrupted access to vital AI technologies necessary for their economic growth.

The IFR's focus on regulating closed-weight AI models while leaving open-weight equivalents unaddressed was also criticized by Castro as creating an imbalance. He argued that this approach imposes regulatory burdens on U.S. companies developing proprietary AI models, which foreign competitors can avoid by using open-source alternatives. According to Castro, this undermines American firms in the global market without effectively mitigating risks.

Castro suggested that instead of restricting access to AI chips or models, future policies should enhance U.S. competitiveness in AI by expanding market access for U.S. chips and technologies, countering geostrategic competitors like China and Russia, focusing on lawful AI applications, and considering the economic implications of chip sourcing decisions.

He concluded that initial restrictions on chip exports were misguided and that the IFR compounds these missteps. Castro urged for a strategy based on competitiveness rather than containment to solidify America's position as a global leader in AI.

Contact information was provided for further inquiries: Nicole Hinojosa at [email protected]