TMT Analysis: David Zeffman, partner, and Carter Rich, associate, at CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP consider the integration of AI into gaming. The analysis discusses the current use of AI in gaming, the developers’ point of view and the practical issues and legal considerations associated with AI in gaming.

MLex: An EU copyright licensing market for training AI technologies remains underdeveloped due to the reluctance of developers to engage in licensing negotiations, according to a summary of responses by European governments and collective management organisations (CMOs) to a policy questionnaire. The survey identifies transparency problems for rights holders and workable opt-out mechanisms for the EU Copyright Directive’s text and data mining exception.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is developing a Scientific Explorer Tool for data mining of scientific information to inform scientific decisions. The tool will be an Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Knowledge Mining led tool to allow simple and precise searching, finding, interrogating, and accessing of scientific information to inform scientific decisions. The scope of the tool’s first version are scientific advice letters.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has announced the launch of a new ‘Supercharged Sandbox’ programme enabling financial services firms to experiment with artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The initiative includes a partnership with NVIDIA to provide firms with access to accelerated computing resources and AI Enterprise Software. This sandbox will benefit firms in the AI discovery and experiment phase and complements the FCA's AI Live Testing service for more developed projects. Applications are now open, with successful participants able to begin experimentation from October 2025.

Costs of the arbitration The costs of the arbitration include (Rule 47.1): • the Arbitral Tribunal’s fees; • the AIAC administrative fee; • reasonable expenses incurred by the Arbitral Tribunal; • any costs of using the AIAC’s facilities and additional services; • any other costs as directed by the Arbitral Tribunal; and • any applicable taxes or other charges Arbitral Tribunal’s fees and AIAC administrative fee Quantum The AIAC Court will fix the fees of the Arbitral Tribunal and the AIAC administrative fee according to the scales set out at Schedule 1A (for international arbitration) and 1B (for domestic arbitration) of the AIAC Rules (Rule 47.3). These fees are calculated based on the amount in dispute, including the value of any claims, counterclaims and any defence of set-off (Rule 47.3). • if the claims and/or counterclaims are unquantified, the Registrar will, after consulting the Arbitral Tribunal and the parties, determine the amount in dispute for the purpose of calculating the deposit towards the costs of the arbitration (Rule 47.4) • the minimum arbitrator’s

Request A party seeking urgent interim measures prior to the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal may request the appointment of an emergency arbitrator (Rule 12.1). The emergency arbitrator request may be filed (Rule 12.2): • before filing the notice of arbitration; • when filing the notice of arbitration; or • at any time prior to the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal If the request is filed before filing the notice of arbitration, the notice of arbitration must be filed within 7 days thereafter (Rule 12.3). The emergency arbitrator request must be in writing and include the following (Rule 12.4): • the names and contact details of the parties and any representatives; • a brief description of the legal and factual basis for the request, identifying the interim measure urgently sought and the grounds for requesting the appointment of an emergency arbitrator; • proof of payment of the emergency arbitrator request fee and the emergency arbitrator’s fees; • confirmation that a copy of the emergency arbitrator request has been delivered to all other parties

Applicable rules Save for the matters governed under Rule 7 and set out in this Practice Note, the remainder of the AIAC Rules will apply to any arbitration conducted according to the Fast Track Procedure (Rule 7.9). Request A party may request the operation of the Fast Track Procedure when commencing the arbitration or at any time before the Arbitral Tribunal is constituted if at least one of the following criteria apply (Rule 7.1): • the Parties have agreed to adopt the Fast Track Procedure or any edition of the AIAC Fast Track Arbitration Rules; • the amount in dispute in the notice of arbitration is less than USD 3 million (for international arbitration) or RM 2 million (for domestic arbitration); or • there is exceptional urgency A request for the Fast Track Procedure (other than based on parties’ agreement) will be determined by the President of the AIAC Court having regard to all relevant circumstances (Rule 7.2). Deposit and costs Amount The AIAC will request a deposit to cover

Introduction The 2026 AIAC Rules represent a significant advancement over the 2023 AIAC Rules. Notably, while the 2023 AIAC Rules incorporated the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2021), the 2026 AIAC Rules have dispensed with this approach. As a result, the 2026 AIAC Rules now operate as a more cohesive and self-contained set of rules and also feature the key changes described below. AIAC Court of Arbitration One of the most significant amendments introduced by the 2026 AIAC Rules is the establishment of the AIAC Court of Arbitration, headed by a President and supported by a Registrar. This new structure replaces the previous Director-centric model found in the 2023 AIAC Rules. Under the revised framework, key functions such as the appointment of arbitrators, the determination of challenges, and decisions on consolidation are now vested in the AIAC Court and/or its President. The Registrar is responsible for the day-to-day administration of arbitrations. This clear division of responsibilities brings the AIAC inline with the governance models adopted by other

Consolidation Request A party may apply to the AIAC to consolidate two or more arbitrations administered under the AIAC Rules into a single arbitration if (Rule 8.1): • the parties agree; • all the claims and counterclaims are made under the same arbitration agreement; or • the claims are made under multiple but compatible arbitration agreements, where there is a common question of law or fact and the rights to relief claimed arise out of the same or a series of related transactions It is unclear from the wording of Rule 3.1(c) whether the ‘common question of law or fact’ limb is intended to work in conjunction with or as an alternative to the ‘same or a series of related transactions’ limb. The former is a new addition to the 2026 AIAC Rules, presumably with the intention of widening rather than narrowing the criteria for consolidation. A consolidation request must include the following (Rule 8.2): • the case reference numbers of the arbitrations to be consolidated; • a copy of the document containing the

Pre-commencement and scope Incorporation Parties are deemed to agree that an arbitration will be conducted and administered by the AIAC in accordance with the 2026 AIAC Rules when they agree to (Rule 1.1(a)): • refer their dispute to the AIAC for arbitration; or • refer their dispute to arbitration in accordance with the AIAC Arbitration Rules Arbitration Act 2005 The following sections of the Arbitration Act 2005 [Act 646] will not apply to arbitrations seated in Malaysia which are conducted and administered by the AIAC under the 2026 AIAC Rules (Rule 1.1(b)): Section 41 (determination of a preliminary point of law by the High Court); and Section 46 (extension of time by the High Court for making an award). Interpretation and definition The English version of the 2026 AIAC Rules will prevail over other language versions (Rule 2.1). Days ‘Days’ are defined as calendar days ending at 11:59 p.m. (GMT +8) unless otherwise specified and include weekends and public holidays (Rule 2.4). It may be sensible to modify this definition

Appointment General rules The President of the AIAC Court is the appointing authority for arbitrations under the AIAC Rules (Rule 15.1). S/he may seek any necessary information from the parties and exercise the powers vested by the AIAC Rules, in exercising the power of appointment (Rule 15.4). Any nomination or agreement by the parties to nominate or appoint the Arbitral Tribunal is subject to confirmation of the appointment by the President (Rule 15.5). Number of arbitrators The parties may agree on the number of arbitrators (Rule 15.2). Failing such agreement in the arbitration agreement, a sole arbitrator will be appointed by default unless the AIAC Court, upon application of a party, determines that the nature and complexity of the dispute warrants appointing three arbitrators instead (Rule 15.3). Considerations for appointment The President will consider the following when appointing arbitrators (Rule 16.1): • the nature and circumstances of the dispute; • the applicable law; • the seat and language of the arbitration; • the nationality of the parties; • the availability of the

Decision making The Arbitral Tribunal can make separate awards on different issues at different times (Rule 41.1). If the Arbitral Tribunal consists of more than one arbitrator, any award or decision will be decided by a majority. If a majority decision cannot be achieved, the award or decision will be made by the presiding arbitrator alone (Rule 41.2). Form An award is final and binding on the parties (Rule 41.3). It must: • be in writing; • state the date on which the Award was made and the seat of the arbitration (Rule 41.5); • state the reasons for the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision unless the parties have agreed that no reasons are to be given (Rule 41.4); • be signed by the arbitrators physically or electronically, unless otherwise provided by law (Rule 41.5); and • if the Arbitral Tribunal consists of more than one arbitrator and any of them fails to sign, be signed by the majority and state the reason for the missing signature (Rule 41.6) Technical review Time limit The