In August 2025, two research centres from the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore – the Centre for Technology, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & the Law (“TRAIL”) and the EW Barker Centre for Law & Business – partnered with research centres from Columbia, Oxford and Tsinghua to co‑organise a truly transnational two‑day conference marking the first‑ever academic collaboration of its kind across these leading global institutions. Titled “Intellectual Property and Technology in the 21st Century: Challenges in the Next Decade”, the conference discussed how intellectual property (“IP”) laws can better deal with disruptive technology trends. The conference was also supported by partners such as Google, ByteDance, the Singapore Academy of Law and the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”).

One of the biggest lessons I learnt in law school was that the law never happens in a vacuum, and in these times of geopolitical tension, economic uncertainty, societal stress and technological acceleration, context matters more than ever. Therefore, I hope in this keynote to provide some context to the discussions that will take place over the next two days.

The advent of sophisticated AI-driven voice cloning has brought to the fore critical legal and ethical challenges regarding the protection of vocal identity. Prompted by recent controversies – including the striking resemblance between OpenAI’s ChatGPT-4o voice and that of Scarlett Johansson – this article examines how generative AI technologies undermine the unique value of the human voice and further complicate the legal questions surrounding personal identity. Through a comparative analysis, the paper evaluates three principal legal frameworks: the right of publicity, personality rights, and the personal data protection right. Each framework – rooted in different legal traditions – offers distinct strengths and limitations in addressing the threats posed by AI-generated voice cloning. By analysing these doctrines’ scope, remedies, and posthumous protections, the study offers a foundation for understanding how existing legal approaches may be applied to the evolving challenges of vocal identity in the era of generative AI.

Although Singapore has legalised sports betting since 1999 and the sector involves billions of dollars, it lacks specific legislation regulating the misuse of inside information in sports betting, one of the two most common forms of match manipulation observed internationally and a recognised money laundering risk. This regulatory gap could be exploited, especially as developments in other jurisdictions reveal emerging legal and policy challenges that Singapore’s existing anti-corruption laws cannot fully address. These implications remain unexamined in the Singapore context and this article seeks to fill that gap by examining these challenges, identifying existing regulatory approaches, and proposing a Hybrid Information-Connected Approach, inspired by Singapore’s financial insider trading laws, for Singapore to consider adopting. By identifying and defining this hybrid approach, this article aims to contribute a framework for future regulatory development in sports betting and support Singapore’s efforts to uphold sports integrity and strengthen its anti-money laundering regime.