Law‑Tech Connect 2026: Detroit Becomes Ground Zero for BVLOS, AI, Counter‑UAS and Cyber Risk Decisions

April 3, 2026 | Dawn Zoldi

The fifth annual Law‑Tech Connect Workshop, an XPONENTIAL 2026 co-located event, presented by P3 Tech Consulting, provides drone and autonomy operators with a live policy and risk playbook. It will run inside XPONENTIAL’s main program at Huntington Place in downtown Detroit, spreading across Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning rather than its historical placement on Monday.

The new embedded format enables XPONENTIAL Full and VIP Conference Pass holders to attend for free. The Workshop’s standalone registration option also still exists and includes XPO hall access. This menu of options makes it easier for operators to bounce between techno‑legal content and the XPO floor where solutions, partners and customers will be waiting. The networking is also unparalleled but at the Workshop and the Law-Tech Connect Networking Social, Wednesday May 13, 5:30pm – 7:30pm at Five Iron Golf, which bridges the two sessions.

For operators trying to make real fleet, policy and investment calls this year, Detroit presents a concentrated chance to pressure‑test assumptions with the people shaping the rules and the technologies. And for attorneys, the event should qualify as a CLE event (self-certified).

The recently streamed Law‑Tech Connect Preview 2, covering Panels 5–8, showed how Day 2  this year’s program on Thursday morning will walk operators through the full stack of decisions they face: where and how they can fly beyond visual line of sight, how far they can lean on AI in operations, what counter‑UAS rules mean for their risk profile and how to shore up the connectivity and cyber backbone their business depends on.

BVLOS and Global UTM: Where Policy Meets Flight Plans

Crowell & Moring partner Mary‑Caitlin Ray returns to Law-Tech Connect again this year to lead Panel 5, “Drone Pathways in the Sky: Global UTM and Beyond Visual Line of Sight Integration.” Her preview made clear this panel will provide the BVLOS and UTM reality check many operators have been waiting for: what needs to be in place for you to fly beyond visual line of sight at scale and how do the major regulatory regimes actually affect your business plan?

The panel will walk through three main policy theaters: Europe, North America and Asia‑Pacific. In Europe, expect highlights of the EU’s layered framework, which includes open, specific and certified categories and a 2021 implementing regulation that created U‑space, designated airspace where services like network remote ID, geofencing, traffic information and conflict detection are mandatory and provided by authorized U‑space service providers under a common information service. For operators, that architecture translates into clearer expectations about where higher‑risk operations can happen and who delivers critical services, but uneven national rollout means cross‑border operations can still face patchwork reality on the ground.

North America’s story is different but just as consequential for operators. BVLOS in the U.S. grew up as a waiver‑based system with narrow, operation‑specific approvals, a model that limited scale and made long‑term investment harder to justify. With the FAA’s BVLOS Aviation Rulemaking Committee and subsequent notice of proposed rulemaking pushing toward performance‑based rules and recognized UAS service suppliers in a role similar to U‑space providers, operators now have a clearer line of sight to more predictable approvals and service‑based infrastructure. The opportunity lies in planning for a future where BVLOS permissions and services can be reusable assets, not one‑off exemptions, but the risk remains that timelines and final rule details may lag business needs.

The panel will also surface opportunities emerging in Japan and Australia, where regulators are using national roadmaps to open higher‑risk operations in steps. Japan’s levels‑based system under its Civil Aeronautics Act amendments and its emphasis on public‑private partnerships for UTM give operators a structured path to more complex missions, as long as they understand which level their use case fits. Australia’s BVLOS trials and UTM sandbox offer a proving ground for concepts and a signal that regulators view drones as integrated aviation assets, not experiments. For operators, these approaches present exportable templates and potential expansion markets, but they also underscore the key risk that every jurisdiction is moving at a different speed, and compliance strategies must adapt rather than assume a single global model.

Ray emphasized that Law‑Tech Connect’s value, and Crowell & Moring’s reason for sponsoring it as a Silver Sponsor again this year, is the candid exchange among operators, investors and lawyers about those real friction points. For operators in Detroit, Panel 5 provides a chance to map specific missions and growth plans against the live trajectories of BVLOS and UTM policy in the regions that matter most.

AI in Autonomy: How Much Risk Can Operators Take On?

If BVLOS and UTM set the boundaries of where and how you can fly, Panel 6, “Minds and Machines: AI Law and Ethics in Autonomous Systems,” gets at the heart of how you run those operations and what tools you trust. The panel includes experts that span defense, commercial industry and multiple major law firms, including Holland & Knight partner Katie Inman, all focused on a tight set of questions: when you build or buy autonomy that relies on advanced software models, what legal and ethical obligations do you inherit, and how do you show that you met them?

“Stakeholders should consider carefully, and at early stages, implementing AI governance programs to ensure consistency with existing regulations and federal policies,” Inman said. In addition, she recommended that stakeholders carefully evaluate or draft provisions in contracts with providers of components or services that use AI. “Specific to aviation, such considerations mean that the stakeholder seeking to use AI should first assess the risk of its use realistically and consider it as a solution or tool on a case-specific basis. This assessment will likely result in striking a balance between human override and full autonomy,” Inman noted.

From a policy perspective, stakeholders should also understand the legal and practical aspects of the use of AI. For example, on the legal side, if use of AI can function as a means of compliance with a performance-based standard, industry should take advantage of this flexibility while ensuring it fulfills the policy goal of the standard. With regard to the practical use of AI, stakeholders should ensure use of AI tools fulfill the basics, especially with regard to security of information, accuracy of assumptions, reliability and consistency.

Use of AI is a fast-moving area. Inman recommends stakeholders stay updated on both state and federal policy and legal developments as they consider using AI in aviation.

The panel will dig into the defense side first, looking at lethal autonomous weapons debates, Department of Defense ethical principles and the spectrum from “human in the loop” to “human out of the loop,” using live lessons from Ukraine to show how theory collides with battlefield improvisation. For operators in dual‑use or defense‑adjacent markets, that discussion goes straight to contract risk, reputational exposure and the documentation they will need if their systems are ever scrutinized after the fact.

On the civil and commercial front, panelists will talk about how powerful software models are being pulled into engineering workflows, operational playbooks and even front‑line troubleshooting, and what that means for duty of care and traceability. Operators face real opportunities here: faster design cycles, more consistent procedures and better decision support. But they also face new categories of risk, from opaque decision paths to regulatory expectations that they monitor, validate and, where necessary, override machine‑generated recommendations.

Layered over all of this is a fast‑evolving regulatory environment. The panel will examine how the EU AI Act’s tiers and obligations map onto autonomy and robotics use cases, how U.S. Executive Order 14110 is shaping agency expectations and what early enforcement and public debates suggest about where regulators will draw lines. For operators, the takeaway is that AI‑enabled tools can be powerful force multipliers but must be deployed with an eye toward documentation, human oversight and clear internal policies, or else risk becoming liability multipliers instead.

Counter‑UAS: When Aircraft Become Everyone’s Threat

Panel 7, “Layers of Protection: Airspace Awareness, Safety and Counter‑Drone Defense,” turns the lens around and asks what happens when drones are the problem, not the solution. Venable partner and Bronze Sponsor Jennifer Daskal, who worked counter‑UAS issues at the White House and DHS, will participate in a discussion that matters for operators on both sides of the equation: those who need protection from hostile drones and those whose legitimate operations could be mistaken for threats.

Daskal pointed to recent events in the Middle East and reports of drone swarms over Barksdale Air Force Base as reminders that sophisticated drone tactics are no longer confined to conflict zones. This panel will start with where U.S. law stands today, including the end‑of‑year passage of SAFER Skies Act provisions in the FY26 National Defense Authorization Act that, for the first time, explicitly permit trained state and local authorities to conduct certain mitigation activities.   Meanwhile, private‑sector entities–including critical infrastructure owners and event organizers lack the  authority to engage in active mitigation, with narrow exceptions for trained correctional facility owners and operators.

For commercial and public safety operators, a central risk lies in misunderstanding who can do what and how to do both detection and mitigation effectively. The panel will unpack what that means for concepts of operations and incident response planning: where detection is enough, when you must partner with law enforcement or federal teams, and how to effectively coordinate to identify unauthorized or and malicious drone use and take appropriate actions in response. 

Technically, the panel will stress the need for multilayered detection that accounts for different drone signatures and the fact that some aircraft emit almost no signal at all. Radar, RF, acoustic and other sensors each cover different parts of the threat space, and operators who own or operate facilities at risk need to understand how those layers fit together. The opportunity is a more realistic assessment of risk and better‑targeted investment in protection. The risk is false confidence in a single sensor or vendor solution that leaves gaps an adversary can exploit.

Daskal and her team will also be hosting a separate tabletop exercise at XPO26 on Tuesday, March 12, where senior level participants who register in advance will respond to a hypothetical multi-pronged drone attack.

Cyber and Connectivity: The Hidden Single Point of Failure

The final panel, “Building Digital Fortresses: Cybersecurity, National Security and Communications Resilience,” closes the loop by focusing on the infrastructure that keeps every drone, robot and system connected and trustworthy. TEAL CMO Robb Monkman, whose company builds resilient connectivity for mission‑critical operations, underscored that if operators “get the network right,” they unlock everything else.

From an operator’s perspective, this panel will translate headline concepts like cyber resilience and supply‑chain security into concrete questions: how many independent communication paths do you really have, what happens to your operations if one fails and how confident are you that your hardware and software stack meets growing security expectations from customers and regulators.

Monkman described Teal as an enabler for leading drone companies, focused on ensuring reliable, always‑on links so operators can complete missions without losing control or situational awareness. That reliability is no longer just a technical feature. It is a policy and business requirement as more contracts and regulatory regimes bake in minimum cyber and continuity standards.

The panel will look at how national security‑driven procurement rules, export controls and domestic sourcing requirements intersect with connectivity and cyber choices. For operators, the opportunity lies in aligning fleets and back‑end systems with these expectations now, positioning themselves as trusted partners for public safety agencies, infrastructure owners and federal customers. The risk is waiting until a lost‑link incident, data breach or supply‑chain review forces a rushed, expensive rebuild under adverse conditions.

Why Law-Tech Connect in Detroit Matters for Operators This Year

Law‑Tech Connect is about giving operators the information and contacts they need to make smarter policy‑driven decisions before events or regulations make the choices for them. Ray sees the workshop as a place where operators can stress‑test expansion plans against live BVLOS and UTM developments worldwide. Daskal views it as a forum to confront the realities of counter‑UAS law and layered detection, and what that means for both protection and deconfliction. Inman views it as a place for candid conversation about the latest developments with AI and best practices for implementing AI solutions without compromising safety. Monkman treats it as a chance to align connectivity and cyber strategies with the legal and mission environment operators actually navigate.

With early‑bird pricing still available for the standalone Law‑Tech Connect registration and a workshop schedule embedded directly into XPONENTIAL, Detroit offers operators a concentrated window for a deep dive crash course on the technologies and policies underpinning BVLOS, AI use, counter‑UAS posture and cyber resilience. For those who see policy and regulation as a constraint, this year’s Law‑Tech Connect makes a different case. In 2026, understanding the rules may be one of the biggest competitive advantages an operator can bring to the table.

• Register for Law-Tech Connect here.
• Register for the LTC Social Networking event here.
• Watch the full LTC Preview, Panels 5-8 here.
• Watch the LTC Preview, Panels 1-4 here.
• Read prior coverage of Panels 1-4 here.
• Register for the CUAS TTX here.