Mauritz Kop Teaches Quantum Governance at the United States Air Force Academy

Mauritz Kop, Founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, returned to the United States Air Force Academy—where he serves as guest professor—to teach cadets a class titled Responsible Quantum Technology: Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework. The session began with the physics and moved to the geostrategic, legal, and ethical architecture the field will need as it matures, addressing two questions the cadets had prepared: why govern quantum before it is mature, and what framework best balances innovation against risk.

From the mechanics to the law

The lecture grounded its policy argument in the physics of the second quantum revolution. Where classical systems encode definite bits, quantum systems exploit superposition, entanglement, and tunneling to unlock new categories of capability across computing, sensing, simulation, and networking—from drug discovery and novel materials to jam-resistant navigation and physically grounded secure communications. The same properties that make the technology powerful, Kop argued, strain a legal order built on certainty, locality, and linear causality, which is why quantum governance calls for a tailored, sui generis approach rather than a retrofit of existing rules. The themes extend the line of work Kop set out in Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology.

Why govern before maturity

On the cadets' first question, Kop drew on the Collingridge dilemma—control is easiest early, when knowledge is limited but options remain open—and on his metaphor of a quantum event horizon, a threshold beyond which technological lock-in makes the path far harder to redirect. Acting while the technology is still malleable, he argued, is not a brake on innovation but a precondition for steering it toward democratic values, public trust, and the legal certainty that long-horizon research and investment depend on.

A two-pillar framework

To the second question, Kop offered an integrated two-pillar response: agile, risk-based regulation that tiers obligations by an application's risk, paired with a strategic industrial and security policy that builds national capacity—funding across the lab-to-market pipeline, supply-chain resilience for critical minerals and components, talent development, and shared research infrastructure. This is the operational form of the Responsible Quantum Technology framework, organized under the SEA principles of safeguarding, engaging, and advancing the technology, and aimed at steering innovation rather than slowing it.

Dual-use and deterrence

For future Air Force and Space Force officers, the dual-use character of quantum technology was the connecting thread. The most acute near-term concern is the cryptographic threat—"Q-Day" and "Harvest Now, Decrypt Later"—which makes the migration to post-quantum cryptography a present-tense security task. Set against great-power competition, Kop's prescription is deliberate stewardship: embedding democratic values into standards early, protecting research from state-sponsored theft, and cooperating with allies, themes he has also brought to venues including the Hoover Institution. The class closed on the conviction that technology's trajectory is a matter of choice, and that engaging its technical, strategic, legal, and ethical dimensions is a core professional responsibility for the officers who will shape these systems.

Meer lezen

Teaching, Quantum Technology, GovernanceMauritz Kop23 oktober 2025Mauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Stanford RQT, National Security, Governance, Policy, Quantum-ELSPI, Standards, US Air Force Academy, Teaching, Dual-Use, Post-Quantum Cryptography

Columbia Law Publishes 'Towards a European Quantum Act' Study by Mauritz Kop

In a landmark academic contribution, Columbia Law School’s prestigious Columbia Journal of European Law (CJEL) is publishing a comprehensive study by Mauritz Kop, a leading scholar in the field of quantum technology governance. Titled "Towards a European Quantum Act: A Two-Pillar Framework for Regulation and Innovation," the paper, published in Volume 31, Issue 1 (Fall 2025), presents a forward-looking and robust framework for the European Union to navigate the complexities of the quantum age. This timely publication in a top ranked journal guided by the intellectual stewardship of renowned Columbia Law professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann, is set to significantly influence the burgeoning transatlantic dialogue on the future of quantum technology.

The full citation for the paper is: Mauritz Kop – Towards a European Quantum Act: A Two-Pillar Framework for Regulation and Innovation (Sept 9, 2025), Volume 31, Issue No. 1, Columbia Journal of European Law, Columbia Law School (2025), final edition forthcoming. Pre-print versions are available on SSRN, arXiv, ResearchGate, the Website of the European Commission, and AIRecht.

The Columbia Journal of European Law: A Bastion of Transatlantic Legal Scholarship

Founded in 1994, the Columbia Journal of European Law has established itself as a leading academic publication dedicated to the study of European law from a transatlantic perspective. Its mission is to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between scholars, practitioners, and policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic. The journal’s history is deeply intertwined with the development of the European Union and the evolving relationship between the EU and the United States. It has consistently published groundbreaking scholarship on a wide range of topics, from competition law and trade to human rights and constitutional law.

The journal's ranking among the top international and European law journals is a testament to its quality and influence. CJEL is currently the single most cited European law journal in the world. It is widely recognized for its rigorous academic standards and its commitment to publishing innovative and policy-relevant research. The journal’s association with Columbia Law School, one of the world’s leading law schools, further enhances its prestige. Columbia Law, located on Amsterdam Avenue in Morningside Heights, Manhattan, New York City, is an Ivy League institution consistantly ranked 3rd in the country - its name carries weight. You can find more information about the journal on its official website: https://cjel.law.columbia.edu/ and its Scholastica page: https://columbia-journal-of-european-law.scholasticahq.com/. For more on the journal's history, the Wikipedia page is a useful resource, and updates can be found on their LinkedIn profile.

CJEL Guided by Star Professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann

The intellectual rigor and policy relevance of Kop's study are a reflection of the Journal’s guidance and mentorship of two of Columbia Law School's most distinguished scholars: Anu Bradford and George Bermann.

Professor Bradford, the Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization, is a world-renowned expert on the "Brussels Effect," a term she coined to describe the European Union's unilateral power to regulate global markets. Her work has profoundly shaped our understanding of the EU's role in the world and its ability to set global standards for technology and other industries. Her insights into the EU’s regulatory power are clearly reflected in Kop’s proposal for a European Quantum Act.

Professor George Bermann is the Walter Gellhorn Professor of Law and the Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law at Columbia Law School. A leading authority on European law, international arbitration, and comparative law, Professor Bermann has been instrumental in shaping the field of European law studies in the United States. His deep understanding of the intricacies of EU law and governance provides a solid foundation for Kop’s ambitious legislative proposal. The combined expertise of these two scholars has undoubtedly enriched the paper, ensuring its legal and political feasibility.

"Towards a European Quantum Act": A Two-Pillar Framework

Kop's paper argues that the European Union has a unique opportunity to shape the global governance of quantum technologies. He proposes a comprehensive "European Quantum Act" based on a two-pillar framework:

Pillar 1: Agile, NLF-Style Regulation: This pillar focuses on creating a flexible and adaptive regulatory framework, similar to the EU’s New Legislative Framework (NLF) for products. It would establish a risk-based approach to regulating quantum technologies, with stricter rules for high-risk applications and more flexibility for low-risk ones. This approach, Kop argues, would allow for innovation to flourish while ensuring that fundamental rights and safety are protected. A key element of this pillar is the "standards-first" philosophy, which prioritizes the development of technical standards as a primary mechanism for embedding democratic values into the very architecture of quantum technologies.

Pillar 2: Ambitious, Chips Act-Style Industrial Policy: This pillar calls for a proactive and ambitious industrial policy to support the development of a competitive and resilient European quantum ecosystem. Drawing inspiration from the U.S. and EU Chips Acts, Kop proposes a range of measures, including funding for research and development, support for startups and SMEs, and the creation of a European quantum infrastructure. This pillar aims to ensure that Europe can compete with the United States and China in the global quantum race.

A Standards-First Approach to Secure a Democratic Future

A central tenet of Kop's proposal is the "standards-first" approach. He argues that technical standards are not merely technical tools but are "vessels for values." By proactively shaping the standards for quantum technologies, the EU can embed its democratic values, such as privacy, fairness, and accountability, into the core of the technology. This approach would not only ensure that quantum technologies are developed and used in a responsible manner but would also give the EU a competitive advantage in the global market for trustworthy quantum systems.

This concept builds upon a recent study published in the prestigious journal Science, senior-authored by Kop. The study, titled "Quantum technology governance: A standards-first approach," was first-authored by Mateo Aboy of Cambridge University, with co-authorship from Urs Gasser, a leading scholar at the Technical University of Munich and Harvard University, and I. Glenn Cohen, Vice Dean of Harvard Law School and Faculty Director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics. This foundational work, which can be accessed here at Science, provides the rigorous academic underpinnings for leveraging standards as a primary tool for responsible technology governance.

The paper, initiated by the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, suggests the creation of a Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS), which would be developed in partnership with international bodies like ISO/IEC and IEEE. This system would provide a certifiable CE mark for quantum systems, signaling their compliance with EU standards and values.

Meer lezen

Mauritz Kop Awarded Senior Fellowship at Leading G7 Think Tank CIGI Waterloo

Mauritz Kop, founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT) and a guest professor at the US Air Force Academy (USAFA), has been appointed a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), a leading Canadian G7 think tank with a global reputation for impactful research and policy advice. This fellowship marks a significant new chapter in Professor Kop's work, allowing for a deeper dive into the intricate and rapidly evolving nexus of quantum technology, artificial intelligence (AI), intellectual property (IP) law, competition policy, and national security. The initial project will focus on developing a comprehensive roadmap for navigating this complex landscape, building on previous engagement with CIGI and long-standing academic and professional connections with Canada.

Mauritz Kop Appointed Senior Fellow at CIGI: A New Chapter in Quantum Governance and Global Security

This CIGI senior fellow appointment is not just a personal honour, but a testament to the growing global recognition of the urgent need for innovative governance models to steer the development of powerful dual-use technologies towards beneficial outcomes for humanity. The challenges are immense, but so are the opportunities. In a world grappling with geopolitical instability and the disruptive potential of emerging technologies, CIGI’s mission to build bridges from knowledge to power has never been more critical. Kop is thrilled to contribute to this mission and to collaborate with CIGI’s distinguished team of experts.

Building on a Foundation: The Dual-Use Project and Previous Engagements

Professor Kop's journey with CIGI began prior to this fellowship, with a seminar delivered on the governance of dual-use quantum technologies. That lecture, titled “Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks,” set the stage for the work he is about to undertake. In that presentation, he argued that we are approaching a “Quantum Event Horizon”—a critical juncture beyond which our ability to shape the trajectory of advanced quantum and AI systems may be irrevocably lost. The core of Kop's argument was that traditional governance models and diplomatic efforts are insufficient to address the systemic challenges posed by a global, high-stakes race for quantum supremacy.

The seminar explored the necessity of a multi-layered governance strategy. This includes not only the development of robust international legal frameworks and oversight bodies, drawing inspiration from nuclear non-proliferation treaties, but also the integration of “Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI” to hardwire universal values into the technology itself. This dual approach, grounded in the principles of responsible innovation, is essential to mitigate the risks of misuse by state and non-state actors, and to ensure that these technologies serve to enhance, rather than undermine, democratic societies.

The positive reception to these ideas and the stimulating discussions that followed with the CIGI community laid the groundwork for this senior fellowship. It became clear that there was a shared understanding of the stakes involved and a common commitment to forging a path towards a safe and equitable quantum future. This fellowship provides the ideal platform to transition from articulating these principles to developing concrete, actionable policy recommendations.

A New Frontier: IP, Competition Law, Quantum, Dual-Use, and National Security

Professor Kop's first project as a CIGI Senior Fellow will be an in-depth analysis of the critical nexus between quantum technology, AI, IP policy, and national security strategy. The convergence of quantum and AI capabilities presents unprecedented challenges for global innovation and strategic stability, most notably the looming threat of “Q-Day,” when a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could break most of the public-key cryptography that underpins our digital world.

This project will draw lessons from historical precedents, particularly the governance of nuclear technology, to inform the development of novel frameworks for quantum governance. A key component of the research will be a comparative analysis of quantum IP strategies across the dominant tech blocs, examining how different approaches to patents, trade secrets, and state secrets are shaping the global quantum race.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology Governance: The Daiki Quantum Governance Recipe and the World's First QT-QMS

Quantum technology arrives with a governance problem unlike the one that classical computing posed. The systems are powerful, dual-use, and—at the hardware level—physically fragile in ways that ordinary quality regimes never had to model. Daiki, the AI and quantum governance company co-founded by Mauritz Kop, has published the Daiki Quantum Governance Recipe to close that gap: a toolkit that turns responsible-innovation principles into an auditable management system, anchored by what Daiki calls the world's first Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS).

A management system for a fragile technology

The QT-QMS is a coined framework, extending to quantum the system-level discipline that ISO 13485 brought to medical devices and ISO/IEC 27001 to information security. The case for a dedicated discipline is physical as much as legal: quantum information lives in fragile superposition states that decoherence degrades on short timescales, and measurement is irreversible, so fidelity, error rates, and calibration drift become first-order operational facts. A quality system built for classical software simply does not have vocabulary for these failure modes, which is why Daiki argues quantum needs a management standard of its own.

Three ingredients, one auditable trail

The Recipe is built around three pillars. A QMS Backbone supplies the ISO-aligned, auditable framework for quality and risk management, integrating ISO/IEC 27001, 27005, and 42001 alongside the proposed QT-QMS. An Ethical Compass operationalizes the Ten Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation—grouped as Safeguarding, Engaging, and Advancing—through checklists, templates, and guided assessments. An Assessment Engine automates Quantum Impact Assessments across the lifecycle, logging every decision into a time-stamped audit trail that spans ex-ante, ex-durante, and ex-post review. Daiki frames the synthesis of the three as a path to Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI: systems hardened against quantum attack and bound to an enforceable set of values.

Standards first, regulation later

The Recipe rests on a standards-first philosophy—voluntary, consensus-driven standards as the most workable foundation for a fast-moving field—and situates that approach inside a four-stage cycle running from principles through soft law to hard law. That sequencing matters for timing: by building governance on standards already taking shape through ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 3, IEEE, and NIST's post-quantum cryptography work, organizations turn today's best practices into tomorrow's compliance evidence as binding frameworks such as a future EU Quantum Act emerge. Daiki points toward system-level certification of a company's QT-QMS by an accredited body, on the medtech model, as the longer-term destination.

Why it matters now

The deeper argument is one of timing and proof. Quantum governance, like AI governance before it, is moving from voluntary commitment to a documented, auditable function—and the organizations best placed for that shift are the ones building a single coherent management system now, rather than assembling a reactive checklist once enforcement arrives. For a quantum ecosystem dominated by startups and research labs, the Recipe's promise is to lower the cost of doing this well, so that responsibility and speed stop being a trade-off.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology, Governance, CertificationMauritz Kop8 augustus 2025Mauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Standards, Governance, Stanford RQT, Ethics, Daiki, QT-QMS, Responsible Quantum Technology, ISO/IEC 42001, Quantum Impact Assessment, Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI, EU Quantum Act

A Standards-First Future for Quantum Governance

Stanford, CA, August 7, 2025—A star team of leading interdisciplinary scholars from the Universities of Cambridge, Harvard, Munich, and Stanford has today published a landmark paper in the prestigious journal Science, outlining a novel and proactive framework for the global governance of quantum technologies. The Science Policy Forum piece titled "Quantum technology governance: A standards-first approach," was led by Professor Mateo Aboy of Cambridge with senior authorship by Mauritz Kop of Stanford. The paper introduces a "Standards-First" approach to regulation, emphasizing the urgent need for harmonized global standards and Quantum Technology Quality Management Systems (QT-QMS). The publication in Science is the culmination of years of dedicated research, synthesizing key takeaways from our annual Stanford RQT Conference and building on thought leadership established in outlets like Nature.

The paper, co-authored by a team representing the very model of interdisciplinary excellence we advocate for - including distinguished professors I. Glenn Cohen of Harvard Law School and Urs Gasser of the Technical University of Munich, addresses one of the most pressing challenges of the quantum age: how to foster innovation responsibly while mitigating the risks of geopolitical fragmentation and a potential "race to the bottom" in safety and ethics.

The core of our argument is the necessity of a "Standards-First" philosophy. Rather than waiting to apply reactive, and often conflicting, national regulations, we contend that the international community must prioritize baseline global standards before quantum technologies become deeply entrenched. This proactive approach aims to prevent a "quantum splinternet"—a fractured ecosystem of incompatible protocols and norms that could stifle innovation and exacerbate international tensions.

The Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS)

Building on this, the paper introduces a practical framework: the Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS). Drawing from established standards in high-consequence industries like medicine and aerospace, QT-QMS provides a clear, certifiable pathway for building safe and reliable quantum products. It translates high-level ethical principles into concrete, operational processes for risk management, lifecycle auditing, and supply chain integrity, simplifying future regulatory efforts.

As senior author Mauritz Kop notes, “Publishing this governance framework in a leading science journal like Science underscores our central message: getting quantum governance right is not just a task for lawyers and policymakers, but an essential, collaborative effort that must deeply involve the scientists and engineers who are building this future. We must embed our shared values directly into the architecture of quantum systems.”

The research provides a clear-eyed analysis of the current global landscape and presents a tangible roadmap for building a stable, interoperable, and responsible quantum ecosystem. By championing a global "race to the top" built on quality, safety, and trust, the framework proposed by Aboy, Gasser, Cohen, and Kop aims to ensure that the profound benefits of the quantum revolution are realized for all groups of our societies.

Charting the Future of Quantum Governance: Our Vision for a Standards-First Approach in Science

Our new Policy Forum piece in Science, titled "Quantum technology governance: A standards-first approach," represents a milestone for our team and for the broader conversation around the future of technology policy. It is the culmination of years of dedicated research, building upon a trajectory of thought leadership established through leading platforms like Nature, and with distinguished academic communities at Stanford, Harvard, Yale, MIT, Berkeley, Oxford, Cambridge, Waterloo, Copenhagen, the Max Planck Institute, and TUM Munchen. This work synthesizes key takeaways from our annual Stanford RQT Conference under Faculty leadership of Professor Mark Lemley, where global leaders convene to tackle these complex issues.

At its core, this piece is a testament to the power of interdisciplinary collaboration. It brought together an all-star team of scholars, each a recognized leader in their respective domain, to forge a unified vision for a more agile, innovative, and secure quantum future.

Meer lezen

Governance, Quantum Technology, Stanford RQTMauritz Kop7 augustus 2025Science, Nature, Quantum Governance, Standards-First, Certification, QT-QMS, Regulation, Stanford RQT, Cambridge, Harvard, Munchen, Mateo Aboy, I. Glenn Cohen, Urs Gasser, Mauritz Kop

Stanford University Library Creates Permanent RQT Scholarship Repository Of Selected Works

Stanford, CA, July 10, 2025 – Stanford University Library, in a significant move to advance the field of responsible quantum innovation, has established a dedicated digital scholarship repository for the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT), that had its Law School tenure from December 2023 to January 2025. This new collection, accessible via the persistent URL https://purl.stanford.edu/hp536nb5631, will preserve and showcase the influential research and scholarly output of the Center, ensuring its global accessibility for researchers, policymakers, and industry leaders.

The Stanford Center for RQT, founded by Mauritz Kop and part of the Stanford Program in Law, Science & Technology led by Mark Lemley, stands at the forefront of shaping a future where quantum advancements contribute to equitable and beneficial social goals. With a mission to foster interdisciplinary research, education, and collaboration, the Center addresses the profound societal impacts of quantum technologies, promoting competition, transparency, inclusivity, intergenerational equity, and sustainable innovation, all while safeguarding human rights and democratic values. A highlight of the Center's public engagement is its annual Stanford Responsible Quantum Technology Conference, which brings together global leaders to discuss the field's most pressing issues. The creation of this repository marks a milestone in the Center's efforts to disseminate its foundational works, and ensures their longevity.

The Stanford Library Permanent RQT Repository

The initial collection features a selection of the Center's influential publications that underscore its commitment to a holistic and forward-thinking governance approach. The showcased works include:

10 Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation: Published in IOP Quantum Science and Technology, this seminal paper by Mauritz Kop and his team outlines a guiding framework for the ethical development of quantum technologies, emphasizing principles from safeguarding and accountability to advancing societal well-being.

Towards Responsible Quantum Technology: This foundational paper from the Harvard Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Publication Series, authored by Mauritz Kop, Mateo Aboy, Eline De Jong, Urs Gasser, Timo Minssen, I. Glenn Cohen, Mark Brongersma, Teresa Quintel, Luciano Floridi & Ray Laflamme, lays out a comprehensive vision for the responsible development and stewardship of the quantum ecosystem.

A Project-Based Approach to Responsible Quantum Innovation

In addition to its publications, the Center's work is driven by a project-based approach that tackles critical challenges at the intersection of quantum technology and society. Key projects include:

Regulating Quantum Technology: This foundational project performs a detailed study of how to sensibly regulate second-generation (2G) quantum technology. It aims to design sui generis governance frameworks that offer strategic blueprints for decision-makers, integrating risk management, resource optimization, and safety standards to ensure that the benefits of quantum are distributed equitably.

Quantum Leap: Decoding Quantum Computing Innovation: In collaboration with the University of Cambridge, this empirical project by Mateo Aboy conducts a comprehensive analysis of the patent landscape in quantum computing. By examining patenting trends, the project provides valuable, evidence-based insights to inform policy decisions related to intellectual property, innovation, and regulation in this rapidly evolving field.

Key Stanford Center for RQT Focus Areas

The Center's research and policy advocacy are concentrated on several key areas critical to the future of quantum technology:

Global Governance and Standards: Studying how technical standards, certification, and other governance mechanisms can foster the trust needed for technology uptake and responsible deployment. This includes exploring governance tipping points, geopolitics, smart regulation, dual-use, supply chains, and export controls, all within a framework that advances first-to-market innovation, reinforces human rights and safeguards democratic values.

Quantum Diplomacy and Government Advocacy: Informing policymakers, diplomats, and the judiciary about the principles of responsible quantum technology, and fostering international dialogue and strategic alliances to shape effective global governance strategies.

The establishment of this repository by the Stanford University Library not only provides a permanent home for the Center's vital scholarship but also reinforces Stanford's leadership in the global dialogue on technology governance. It serves as an essential resource for anyone seeking to understand and contribute to the responsible development of the quantum future.

Thanks to Professor Mark Lemley and to Beth Williams, Associate Dean, Robert Crown Law Library & Senior Lecturer in Law, for curating the RQT Repository.

To explore the full collection, please visit https://purl.stanford.edu/hp536nb5631.

Meer lezen

Academics, Quantum ELSPI, Quantum Technology, Stanford RQT, UniversityMauritz Kop10 juli 2025Stanford University Library, RQT Repository, Scholarship, Stanford Law School, Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, Fellows, Conference, Mark Lemley, Mauritz Kop

EU AI Act Compliance for Global Enterprises: The Daiki Solution for Mandatory AI Governance

The European Union's AI Act has crossed the line from proposal to binding law, and its phased rollout is now an active clock rather than a distant horizon. Daiki, the AI and quantum governance company co-founded by Mauritz Kop, has published an account of what mandatory AI governance demands of global enterprises—and how an integrated, standards-based platform can convert that obligation into a strategic advantage.

A calendar that has already started

The Act entered into force on August 1, 2024. The prohibition on unacceptable-risk practices took effect in February 2025; obligations for general-purpose AI models began in August 2025; and full application—conformity assessments, CE marking, EU-database registration, post-market monitoring for high-risk systems—arrives on August 2, 2026, with a final grace period for regulated-product components running to 2027. Because the Act binds any provider whose systems reach the EU market or whose outputs are used within it, its reach is extraterritorial: a firm headquartered in New York or Singapore is squarely within scope, and penalties of up to €35 million or 7% of worldwide turnover make non-compliance a board-level risk.

The pyramid of criticality

The Act's organizing idea is a risk-based pyramid: unacceptable-risk practices are banned; high-risk systems—reaching common enterprise uses in hiring, credit scoring, and critical infrastructure—carry the heaviest lifecycle obligations; limited-risk systems owe transparency; and minimal-risk applications attract no new mandates. The Daiki solution operationalizes that structure, classifying each system through a rules engine aligned with the Act's definitions and Annex III, then triggering a workflow proportionate to its tier, with every action logged to an auditable evidence trail. Its architecture is anchored in ISO/IEC 42001, bridged to the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, and bounded throughout by deliberate human oversight—mirroring the Act's own Article 14.

A risk-based reading with a documented lineage

The post's central reading—that a risk-based regime rewards organizations able to prove their governance—has a clear history in Kop's scholarship. As Mauritz Kop's record of work shows, his 2021 analysis of the EU AI Act anticipated the four-tier architecture that is now law, and the same logic carries across the Atlantic to California's compute-threshold approach for frontier models. For general counsel and compliance leaders, the practical takeaway is consistent: build one coherent, standards-based governance system now—rather than a reactive checklist per statute—and the era of enforcement will reward exactly the discipline the era of voluntary principles merely recommended. Mandatory AI governance, as the post observes, is here to stay; the enterprises that treat it as design rather than damage control will be the trusted artificial intelligence leaders of the regulated decade ahead.

Meer lezen

Artificial Intelligence, European Law, GovernanceMauritz Kop23 juni 2025Mauritz Kop, AI, Regulation, Policy, Governance, Standards, Daiki, EU AI Act, AI Governance, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, Brussels Effect, Risk-Based Regulation, Frontier AI

Mauritz Kop gives Quantum Governance Seminar at G7 Think Tank CIGI, the Centre for International Governance Innovation

Honoured to give a Quantum Governance seminar this Monday at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), a leading non-partisan G7 think tank based in Waterloo. We’ll address a critical question: Are our governance frameworks ready for Quantum-AI? https://www.cigionline.org/events/responsible-quantum-ai-governance-from-ethical-principles-to-global-frameworks/

We are approaching a metaphorical ‘Quantum Event Horizon’—an inflection point, or quantum governance ‘tipping point’ beyond which our ability to steer advanced quantum technology and AI towards beneficial societal outcomes, may be lost. In a geopolitical context defined by a winner-takes-all race for the keys to the world’s operating system, the stakes could not be higher. This issue is at the heart of CIGI’s project on the guidance of emerging dual-use technologies.

Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks

My lecture, titled ‘Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks’ explores why traditional governance and quantum diplomacy are not enough to address systemic rivalry and human-machine control problems. Instead, it requires planetary-level thinking and a fundamental shift from reactive oversight to novel paradigms of architectural control. The work builds on ideas we first explored in 'Ethics in the Quantum Age' (Physics World) and 'Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology' (Yale Journal of Law & Technology).

Multi-layered governance strategy

I will make the case for a multi-layered governance strategy. In addition to hardwiring universal values into the technology itself via Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI, we need robust global legal frameworks and oversight bodies ensuring non-proliferation of dual-use quantum-AI technologies via safeguards implementation (inspired by nuclear governance), including the creation of an 'Atomic Agency for Quantum-AI' and a new international treaty to constitute a ‘Quantum Acquis Planétaire’, or 'Global Quantum Acquis'. This dual approach is grounded in the principles of responsible quantum innovation we've outlined in recent publications with Nature, Harvard Law, Stanford Law, and the Institute of Physics.

I will conclude my talk with emphasizing that building a safe and equitable quantum future requires unprecedented international collaboration, drawing inspiration from successful large-scale scientific cooperation models like CERN and ITER. Now is the critical window for the international community to design and build these innovative governance structures, steering the immense power of quantum science towards beneficial outcomes for all of humanity.

We hope you can join what promises to be a vital discussion.

Meer lezen

Academics, ConferenceMauritz Kop14 juni 2025CIGI, Seminar, Quantum Governance, Mauritz Kop, G7

Quantum Event Horizon: Addressing the Quantum-AI Control Problem through Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI

What happens when AI becomes not just superintelligent, but quantum-superintelligent? QAI agents with both classical and quantum capabilities? How do we ensure we remain in control?

This is the central question of my new article, where I introduce the concept of the Quantum Event Horizon to frame the urgency of the QAI control problem. As we near this point of no return, the risk of losing control to misaligned systems—machines taking over or seeing them weaponized—becomes acute.

A metaphorical Quantum Event Horizon can be thought of as an inflection point, or quantum governance 'tipping point' beyond which our ability to steward advanced quantum technology and AI towards beneficial outcomes for all of humanity, may vanish.

Simple guardrails are not enough. The solution must be architectural. I propose a new paradigm: Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI, a method for engineering our core values into the foundation of QAI itself. This is a crucial discussion for policymakers, researchers, builders, and industry leaders.

Navigating the Quantum Event Horizon

This paper addresses the impending control problem posed by the synthesis of quantum computing and artificial intelligence (QAI). It posits that the emergence of potentially superintelligent QAI agents creates a governance challenge that is fundamentally different from and more acute than those posed by classical AI. Traditional solutions focused on technical alignment are necessary but insufficient for the novel risks and capabilities of QAI. The central thesis is that navigating this challenge requires a paradigm shift from reactive oversight to proactive, upfront constitutional design.

The core of the argument is framed by the concept of the ‘Quantum Event Horizon’—a metaphorical boundary beyond which the behavior, development, and societal impact of QAI become computationally opaque and practically impossible to predict or control using conventional methods. Drawing on the Collingridge dilemma and the Copenhagen interpretation, this concept highlights the risk of a "point of no return," where technological lock-in, spurred by a "ChatGPT moment" for quantum, could cement irreversible geopolitical realities, empower techno-authoritarianism, and present an unmanageable control problem (the risk of machines taking over). Confronting this requires a new philosophy for governing non-human intelligence.

Machines Taking Over

The urgency is magnified by a stark geopolitical context, defined by a Tripartite Dilemma between the existential safety concerns articulated by figures like Geoffrey Hinton, the geopolitical security imperative for rapid innovation voiced by Eric Schmidt, and the builder’s need to balance progress with safety, as expressed by Demis Hassabis. This dilemma is enacted through competing global innovation models: the permissionless, market-driven US system; the state-led, top-down Chinese system; and the values-first, deliberative EU model. In this winner-takes-all race, the first actor to achieve a decisive QAI breakthrough could permanently shape global norms and our way of life.

An Atomic Agency for Quantum-AI

Given these stakes, current control paradigms like human-in-the-loop oversight are inadequate. The speed and complexity of QAI render direct human control impossible, a practical manifestation of crossing the Quantum Event Horizon. Therefore, governance must be multi-layered, integrating societal and institutional frameworks. This includes establishing an "Atomic Agency for Quantum-AI" for international oversight and promoting Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT) by Design, guided by principles such as those outlined in our '10 Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation' article. These frameworks must be led by robust public governance—as corporate self-regulation is insufficient due to misaligned incentives—and must address the distributive justice imperative to prevent a "Quantum Divide."

Towards Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI

The cornerstone of our proposed solution is Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI. This approach argues that if we cannot control a QAI agent tactically, we must constrain it architecturally. It builds upon the concept of Constitutional AI by designing a core set of ethical and safety principles (a 'constitution') that are not merely trained into the model but are formally verified and made robust against both classical and quantum-algorithmic exploitation. By hardwiring this quantum-secure constitution into the agent's core, we can create a form of verifiable, built-in control that is more likely to endure as the agent's intelligence scales.

Self-Aware Quantum-AI Agents

Looking toward more speculative futures, the potential for a Human-AI Merger or the emergence of a QAI Hive Mind—a networked, non-human consciousness enabled by quantum entanglement—represents the ultimate challenge and the final crossing of the Quantum Event Horizon. The foundational governance work we do today, including projects like Quantum-ELSPI, is the essential precursor to navigating these profound transformations.

In conclusion, this paper argues that for the European Union, proactively developing and implementing a framework centered on Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI is not just a defensive measure against existential risk. It is a strategic necessity to ensure that the most powerful technology in human history develops in alignment with democratic principles, securing the EU’s role as a global regulatory leader in the 21st century.

Meer lezen

A Principled Approach to Quantum Technology: The Stanford RQT Framework and Its Ten Principles

Quantum hardware is advancing faster than the rules meant to govern it. In A Principled Approach to Quantum Technologies (posted as a preprint on SSRN), Mauritz Kop—Founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology—surveys the 2024–2025 wave of breakthroughs from Google, IBM, D-Wave, Quantinuum, and Microsoft, and argues that the governance gap should be closed now, through the Stanford RQT framework and its Ten Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation, rather than by waiting for comprehensive regulation.

Capability is outpacing governance

The paper reads the hardware moment carefully: Google's 105-qubit Willow crossing the below-threshold error-correction milestone; IBM's modular roadmap; D-Wave's 4,400-plus-qubit Advantage2 and its 2025 supremacy claim on a materials-simulation problem; Quantinuum and Microsoft's progress on logical qubits; and Microsoft's Majorana 1 topological chip, presented as a scientific advance still facing real scaling challenges. The trajectory—rising capability across computing, simulation, sensing, networking, and quantum/AI hybrids—is what makes governance urgent, because the field still lacks unified interoperability standards, certification, benchmarking, and quantum-ready quality-management systems.

Quantum-ELSPI and dual use

The governance frame is Quantum-ELSPI: the ethical, legal, socio-economic, and policy implications of quantum technology. Because second-generation quantum systems directly harness superposition, entanglement, and tunneling, their dual-use character is acute—quantum simulation can yield vaccines or weapons, sensors can serve the environment or surveillance—and a sufficiently capable machine could break today's encryption, making preparation for "Q-day" through post-quantum cryptography and NIST standards a present-tense task. The paper draws an explicit lesson from nuclear technology—society justifies medical and energy uses while doing little about the destructive extreme—an asymmetry quantum governance should not repeat. The deeper lessons come from a community Kop helped build, surveyed in the second annual Stanford Responsible Quantum Technology Conference.

The RQT framework and SEA

The constructive answer is Responsible Quantum Technology, operationalized through Ten Principles organized under safeguarding, engaging, and advancing (SEA) quantum technologies, society, and humankind—the aim being to safeguard society through advancing quantum technology, a responsible but pro-innovation stance. The framework also folds in the four dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation—anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion, and responsiveness—and treats regulation as a balancing act, invoking the Collingridge dilemma to argue for anticipatory governance before the technology becomes locked in. Absent formal regulation beyond security and export controls, stakeholders are urged to adopt self-regulatory quantum-technology-assessment tools to monitor, validate, and audit applications across their life cycle—an approach the paper frames as both a public good and a first-mover advantage. Kop developed this institutional home as the center's founder, whose launch at Stanford set the agenda the paper now systematizes. Its governing maxim—quantum R&D kept "as open as possible, and as closed as necessary"—frames a deliberate path through the current regulatory vacuum.

Meer lezen

Music Law and Artificial Intelligence: From Cloned Artists to AI-Generated Works

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the music industry is sparking a revolution, profoundly changing how music is created. This development raises complex legal questions concerning AI and copyright, including related rights. How can we protect the creative rights of artists and composers while simultaneously allowing room for technological innovation? In this comprehensive yet accessible legal overview, we explore key issues regarding AI and music. These include whether AI can legally train on copyrighted materials without consent, TDM exceptions, how various rights organizations (such as Buma/Stemra and Sena) approach AI, the status of AI-generated musical works, the threshold of human creativity required, protection against AI voice cloning via privacy laws and moral rights, contractual implications, new obligations under the EU AI Act, differences between European and American law, and ongoing lawsuits. This article is tailored for artists, composers, music publishers, labels, voice actors, producers, and AI companies seeking clarity on their legal standing.

AI Training on Protected Music and Video Materials: Legal Framework and Debate

Can an AI model in the Netherlands and the EU train on copyrighted material (such as music or video) without permission from the rights holders? Generally, using protected material beyond private use or citation requires permission. Scraping or using data for AI training without permission is typically considered infringement unless a specific legal exception applies.

Buma/Stemra’s Opt-Out Policy

In the Netherlands, Buma/Stemra explicitly uses its opt-out rights, requiring prior consent for TDM on its repertoire, thus ensuring fair compensation for composers and lyricists.

EU AI Act: Transparency Obligations and System Monitoring

The EU AI Act, effective from August 2025, introduces important transparency requirements, obliging generative AI model developers to:

Disclose training data used, including copyrighted music or texts.
Maintain policies ensuring compliance with EU copyright law.
Respect explicit opt-out signals from rights holders during training.

The Act doesn't prohibit using protected material for training outright but enforces transparency and compliance through oversight and penalties.

Composition, Lyrics, and Master Recordings: Different Rights Regimes

Music rights in the Netherlands broadly split into:

A. Copyright: Protects compositions and lyrics, managed by organizations like Buma/Stemra.

B. Neighboring Rights: Protect recordings and performances, managed by Sena.

AI-Generated Compositions and Lyrics: Completely AI-generated works often fail to meet traditional copyright criteria, as human creativity is essential.

Neighboring Rights: It remains uncertain whether AI-generated performances and recordings attract neighboring rights, as these typically rely on human involvement.

Copyright Status of AI-Generated Music

In the U.S., fully AI-generated works explicitly do not receive copyright protection. While Europe hasn't clarified explicitly, the prevailing legal view aligns with this stance—AI-generated works likely fall into the public domain unless there's significant human creativity involved.

Hybrid Creations: Music combining human and AI input may qualify for copyright protection depending on the human creative contribution's significance.

AI Voice Cloning: Personality Rights and Privacy

AI voice cloning technology poses challenges regarding personal rights and privacy. Artists may invoke:

Privacy rights under EU law (Article 8 ECHR).
Personality rights.
Potential trademark and image rights analogously.

The EU AI Act mandates transparency in AI-generated content, aiming to mitigate unauthorized use and deepfake concerns.

Music Contracts in the AI Era

Existing music contracts require updates addressing AI-specific matters, including (1) Explicit licensing terms for AI training; (2) Ownership clarity of AI-generated content; and (3) Liability assignment for copyright infringements involving AI.

Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Rights—Be Prepared

The intersection of AI and music law presents both opportunities and challenges. Stakeholders should proactively:

Clearly define rights in AI-generated music contractually and update existing music contracts.
Specify permissions (licenses) and restrictions (opt-out) regarding AI training explicitly.
Seek specialized music & AI legal advice to navigate evolving regulations.

By strategically addressing these issues, artists, companies, and AI developers can legally and effectively harness AI innovations, maintaining both creative and commercial control.

Meer lezen

The US ISO 42001 Standards-Centric Approach to AI Governance: Compliance, Trust, and Innovation (Daiki Repost)

AIRecht reposts, in full and with permission, a Daiki essay by Mauritz Kop, Co-Founder, on why the United States is converging on a standards-centric model of artificial intelligence governance—and why ISO/IEC 42001 has become its anchor. The repost is presented as published on May 13, 2025, with its original spellings, figures, and references intact.

A standards-first answer to a fragmented regime

The American approach to AI is, by design, light on binding federal statute and heavy on voluntary, risk-based guidance: the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, sector-specific direction from the FTC, EEOC, and FDA, and a patchwork of state laws. Into that fragmentation steps ISO/IEC 42001, the world's first international standard for AI Management Systems, published in December 2023. The essay's argument is that a single, certifiable management system can do what a stack of statute-shaped checklists cannot—give an organization one coherent governance posture that travels across jurisdictions.

The transatlantic bridge

The stakes are clearest for U.S. companies selling into Europe. ISO 42001 certification is not the same as EU AI Act compliance, but the two overlap heavily on risk management, data governance, transparency, documentation, and human oversight—precisely the obligations the Act imposes on high-risk systems. The repost frames the standard as a "common language" that lets a U.S. firm demonstrate diligence to European regulators and partners without building a separate compliance machine for each market. It is the same standards-first logic Kop and colleagues have argued for in quantum governance, where international standards substitute for legislation that has not yet caught up to the technology.

From paperwork to governance asset

The closing move is strategic rather than procedural. Under an anticipated period of U.S. federal deregulation, the essay contends, a globally recognized standard offers stability that domestic political cycles cannot: a baseline of good governance that holds regardless of which executive orders survive. The Daiki method then operationalizes that posture through six integrated components—an AI system registry, an EU AI Act toolkit, an ISO 42001 implementation framework, ISO 27001 data-security integration, MDR/ISO 13485 support for medical AI, and a responsible generative-AI framework—so overlapping requirements are managed once, not many times. The throughline connects to Daiki's wider body of work on operationalizing regulation, including its EU AI Act compliance solution and its quantum-governance recipe.

Why repost it here

For boards, general counsel, and AI program leads, the practical message is that the era of principles is giving way to an era of evidence: organizations will increasingly be asked to prove their governance, not merely assert it. Reposting the essay in full preserves Kop's argument verbatim while placing it alongside AIRecht's running coverage of Mauritz Kop's work at the intersection of AI, standards, and responsible technology governance.

Meer lezen

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

From the mechanics to the law

Why govern before maturity

A two-pillar framework

Dual-use and deterrence

The Columbia Journal of European Law: A Bastion of Transatlantic Legal Scholarship

CJEL Guided by Star Professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann

"Towards a European Quantum Act": A Two-Pillar Framework

A Standards-First Approach to Secure a Democratic Future

Mauritz Kop Appointed Senior Fellow at CIGI: A New Chapter in Quantum Governance and Global Security

Building on a Foundation: The Dual-Use Project and Previous Engagements

A New Frontier: IP, Competition Law, Quantum, Dual-Use, and National Security

A management system for a fragile technology

Three ingredients, one auditable trail

Standards first, regulation later

Why it matters now

The Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS)

Charting the Future of Quantum Governance: Our Vision for a Standards-First Approach in Science

The Stanford Library Permanent RQT Repository

A Project-Based Approach to Responsible Quantum Innovation

Key Stanford Center for RQT Focus Areas

A calendar that has already started

The pyramid of criticality

A risk-based reading with a documented lineage

Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks

Multi-layered governance strategy

Navigating the Quantum Event Horizon

Machines Taking Over

An Atomic Agency for Quantum-AI

Towards Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI

Self-Aware Quantum-AI Agents

Capability is outpacing governance

Quantum-ELSPI and dual use

The RQT framework and SEA

AI Training on Protected Music and Video Materials: Legal Framework and Debate

Buma/Stemra’s Opt-Out Policy

EU AI Act: Transparency Obligations and System Monitoring

Composition, Lyrics, and Master Recordings: Different Rights Regimes

Copyright Status of AI-Generated Music

AI Voice Cloning: Personality Rights and Privacy

Music Contracts in the AI Era

Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Rights—Be Prepared

A standards-first answer to a fragmented regime

The transatlantic bridge

From paperwork to governance asset

Why repost it here

Juridische diensten en projecten in Nederland en daarbuiten