Practical guide · Article 50 of the AI Act

AI Act and AI advertising:what it requires, what it does not,and how to prepare a campaign.

Article 50 has applied since 2 August 2026, but it does not require a visible label on every advert that used AI. This guide separates provider and deployer duties, explains deepfake disclosure and turns traceability into a manageable production workflow.

Reviewed 23 August 2026 · General information, not legal advice

In one sentence: providers of generative AI systems must enable machine-readable marking of outputs; deployers must disclose deepfakes and certain AI-generated or manipulated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest, unless it has undergone human review or editorial control and a person holds editorial responsibility for publication. Our visible disclosure, marking-preservation and documentation workflow is a voluntary production standard, not a universal legal package for every advert.

Applies
From 2 August 2026
Provider
Output marking and detectability
Deployer
Disclosure in specific cases
Retroactivity
None for pre-2 August content
Limited grace
To 2 December for certain earlier systems
Reviewed
23 August 2026

What the law says

Three functions that should not be mixed

Duties depend on the organisation’s role and the specific content, not on whether the campaign used an AI tool.

System provider

Must design generative systems so outputs carry effective, reliable, robust, interoperable machine-readable marking, subject to the stated editing and contextual exceptions.

Deployer

Must clearly disclose deepfakes and certain AI-generated or manipulated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest, unless it has undergone human review or editorial control and a person holds editorial responsibility for publication. This is not a blanket rule for every advert.

Direct interaction

Providers of systems that interact directly with people must inform them they are interacting with AI unless that is obvious. This chatbot rule is separate from audiovisual disclosure.

Standard assistive editing may fall outside provider marking. Film backgrounds, VFX and technical pre/post-production are not automatically deepfakes: resemblance, message, deployment context and audience expectations matter.

First decision

Assess applicability piece by piece

Ask who is using which system, what the piece depicts and whether it could falsely appear authentic or truthful in its deployment context.

CaseArticle 50 treatmentReason
Deepfake of an existing person, object, place, entity or eventClear deployer disclosureIt must falsely appear authentic or truthful; context and audience expectations count.
AI-generated or manipulated text published to inform the public on matters of public interestDisclosure, subject to the editorial exceptionThe exception requires human review or editorial control and a person holding editorial responsibility for publication.
Clearly fictional or creative advertisingCase by case; no universal visible labelAny applicable disclosure for artistic or fictional work may avoid hampering enjoyment.
Standard colour, audio clean-up or assistive editingUsually outside provider markingWhere it does not substantially alter input data or meaning.
Film backgrounds, set extensions, VFX or technical postContextual assessmentCommission guidance says these are unlikely to deceive where authenticity is not expected.
Content generated before 2 August 2026No retroactive labelling dutyVoluntary transparency is encouraged.

Where disclosure applies or is chosen

Integrate it by channel

Article 50 requires applicable information to be clear, distinguishable and accessible; it does not prescribe one sentence for every medium. These are production recommendations, not fixed legal formulas.

ChannelRecommended practiceCheck
TV and VODClear disclosure by first exposure; for creative work, integrate it without hampering the experienceLegibility, duration and delivery notes
Social platformsUse platform declarations and add visible disclosure where the assessment requires itReview each platform’s separate policies
Web, display and DOOHPerceivable disclosure in the creative or immediate context when applicableReadable at every size and distance
AudioAudible disclosure when the relevant case requires itFirst exposure and clarity

Provider duty

Machine-readable marking

Article 50(2) addresses the provider of the generative system. It should not be confused with a visible deployer disclosure.

What the provider must enable

Outputs marked and detectable as AI-generated or manipulated through effective, reliable, robust, interoperable and technically feasible solutions.

What we do in production

Inventory tools, check what marking reaches the file and seek to preserve it through editing and export. This is technical preparation, not legal certification.

A limited grace period to 2 December 2026 covers certain systems placed on the market before 2 August, and only the marking and detection duty in Article 50(2).

Second decision

Map roles before production

Brand, agency and production company are not automatic legal categories under Article 50.

Provider

Develops or has the system developed and places it on the market or puts it into service under its name.

Deployer

Uses the system under its authority in a professional activity and assesses any disclosure duty.

Production chain

Can allocate technical tasks, approvals and archives by contract, without changing the statutory role by wording alone.

Our voluntary standard

Six pre-release controls

These are production controls, not six universal legal duties.

1 · Inventory and roles

Pieces, systems, generation dates, provider and deployer.

2 · Applicability

Deepfake, public-interest text, assistive editing, fiction or VFX.

3 · Disclosure if applicable

Clear channel format or voluntary brand transparency.

4 · Provider marking

Check and preserve available machine-readable marking.

5 · Rights and traceability

Tools, sources, licences, consents and decisions.

6 · Archive and review

Masters, versions and points needing legal validation.

Applied review

Use the checklist on your own campaign

Tell us about the piece, systems and channels. We can run a technical applicability review or a team workshop and define scope, deliverables and schedule after reviewing the context.

Request a review

Need production support?

Applicability, traceability and technical preparation

We review or produce the piece, check available marking, prepare disclosure where applicable and document rights and versions. We do not guarantee legal compliance and coordinate with your counsel where needed.

See the technical preparation service

Frequently asked questions

Article 50 without shortcuts

When did Article 50 start applying, and is it retroactive?
Article 50 applies from 2 August 2026. Content generated before that date does not have to be labelled retroactively, although the Commission encourages voluntary disclosure where possible. A limited grace period until 2 December 2026 applies to certain systems placed on the market before 2 August and only to the provider marking and detection duty in Article 50(2).
Do I need a disclosure if AI was only used for editing?
Not automatically. Provider marking does not apply where the system performs an assistive function for standard editing without substantially altering the input data or its meaning. A deployer disclosure depends on whether the final piece is a deepfake or another specific case covered by Article 50(4).
Does every AI-produced advert need a visible label?
No. Article 50 does not create a universal visible label for every advert that used AI. A deployer must disclose deepfakes clearly by first exposure. For evidently artistic, creative, satirical or fictional works, any applicable disclosure may be made in a way that does not hamper enjoyment of the work.
What is machine-readable marking?
It is the technical marking that providers of generative AI systems must enable in their outputs so those outputs can be detected as AI-generated or manipulated. It is not the same as a visible deployer disclosure. In production we check and seek to preserve available marking, without replacing the provider’s obligation.
Do platform labels take care of this for me?
Platform tools and policies can help, but they are separate from the Article 50 assessment. First identify the provider and deployer, whether the content is a deepfake or another disclosure case, and any additional platform rules.
Who is responsible: the brand, agency or production company?
Article 50 assigns duties by function, not commercial label. A provider develops or places the system on the market under its name; a deployer uses it under its authority. A brand, agency or production company may perform different functions in different projects, so the allocation should be documented and legally reviewed where needed.
What penalties can apply?
The Commission states that transparency infringements may attract fines of up to EUR 15 million or 3% of worldwide annual turnover, with proportionality for SMEs and small mid-cap companies. Enforcement sits mainly with national market-surveillance authorities.

Official sources: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689; Commission Guidelines; Commission FAQ; Quick Facts; and Regulation (EU) 2026/1744. General information, not legal advice. Reviewed 23 August 2026.