The rule was an effort to ensure that the world's largest data centers would be built by the United States and its allies, rather than in the Middle East or elsewhere. Biden officials were skeptical on autocratic trends and autocratic ties of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. They also argued that the rule would limit China's access to chips and data centers in other countries, which could strengthen Beijing's strategic and military skills.
The rule, which should have come into force on May 15, allowed unlimited sales of chips to 18 allies such as Great Britain, Germany and Japan and blocked sales in China, Iran and other opponents. All other countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, India, Israel and Poland, faced limits on the number of chips they could buy and many were not happy.
Jim Secreto, a former deputy chief of the staff of the Department of Commerce, said that the rule aimed to preserve national security and model the future of critical technology. Without regulation, the availability of low cost energy and capital abroad could mean that the more data center would be built outside the United States than inside.
“Who controls the IA is the geopolitical question of our time,” he said.
Companies like Nvidia and Oracle also protested the rule, saying that it would be renamed to the technological leadership of the United States. Trump officials seemed to agree with this topic. Last Wednesday, the Administration presented a deposit in which it is said that he would publish a new rule that would cancel the previous framework, although he did not give a time sequence for change.
“The Biden Ai rule is excessively complex, bureaucratic and would hinder American innovation,” said Ben Kass, spokesman for the Department of Commerce, which supervises technological checks. “We are replacing it with a simpler and clearer framework that gives priority to the United States domain and triggers the full potential of American innovation of artificial intelligence”.