The Article 50 Readiness Pack gives you everything you need to comply with the EU AI Act's transparency obligations: the disclosures, the vendor clauses, the evidence, and two executive guides built from the Commission's own material. Self-serve, inside the platform. No consultant.
Applied since 2 August 2026. A permanent obligation, not a deadline that passed.
To 2 December 2026, when the Article 111(4) marking transitional ends for generative systems placed on the market before 2 August 2026.
Article 50 is the obligation an authority can test from outside your building. It needs no access to your model, your training data or your pipeline: it needs a browser.
The split between provider and deployer is where it goes wrong. Two duties, two duty-holders, and a deployer cannot lean on the provider’s machine-readable marking to discharge its own labelling duty.
If a system interacts directly with people and never says it's AI, that's a visible, provable failure. No forensics required, and the Commission's Article 50 guidelines have narrowed the “it's obvious” defence to almost nothing for consumer-facing systems.
Providers of generative systems must mark audio, image, video and text as artificially generated, and make a detection route available. The duty sits on the provider, not across the chain.
A common blind spot in HR, retail and security. The duty to notify sits with the deployer, before exposure.
Deployers must label them clearly and distinguishably, with no transition period. And your supplier's machine-readable watermark does not discharge it. The label has to be one a human can see or hear.
These are the standard product-safety powers every Member State must confer, and on 2 August 2026 they reached AI systems.
The power to acquire product samples, including under a cover identity, to inspect them and reverse-engineer them, in order to obtain evidence. Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, Article 14(4)(j).
The power to carry out unannounced on-site inspections, and to enter any premises, land or vehicle used for the business.
Where the risk is serious enough, order content off your site or a warning displayed to your users, and if you do not comply, require your hosting provider to restrict access to it.
Which of your systems trigger Article 50, and whether you are the provider or the deployer for each. The highest-value step, and the one most organisations have never done.
The compliant wording for the §50(1) chatbot notice, the §50(3) emotion and biometric notice and the §50(4) deepfake label, with placement, timing and persistence guidance, and the Commission's own list of approaches that do not count.
The contract language that puts your AI supplier on the hook to mark output machine-readably, with the acceptance test that proves they did. Where §50(2) is your duty it stays your duty, but the work sits in someone else's pipeline, and this is how you get it done.
A clear read on whether to sign the Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content: what it gets you, and what it commits you to.
The records that show you assessed each system, chose an approach and documented why. Under enforcement the question is “show us what you did.” This answers it.
A scored readiness assessment across the four duties and the Article 50(5) standard, plus the Code decision, with a gap and remediation log, every gap carrying an action, an owner and a target date.
Self-serve, inside the platform, with no consultant. Buying it starts with a free 30-minute call. It includes everything in the Article 4 AI Literacy Register, so the literacy record and the transparency record are one file rather than two.
See the Article 4 AI Literacy RegisterIncludes:
Article 111(4) reaches providers only, generative systems only, and only systems placed on the market before 2 August 2026. A deployer gains nothing from it.
The Commission's Guidelines are explicit: such a system benefits from the transitional for the §50(2) marking duty, while the §50(1) interaction disclosure was due on 2 August 2026 regardless.
Content generated before 2 August 2026 does not have to be labelled retroactively. The Commission encourages it but does not require it. For images, audio and video the generation date governs. For text published to inform the public on matters of public interest, the publication date governs. Drafted in July and published in August, it needs a label.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, not from somebody else's summary of it.
The Article 50 Guidelines and the Commission's Article 50 FAQ, with the exceptions each duty actually carries.
On this Regulation, plus a documented defect in the Commission's own AI Act Compliance Checker.
We go through what you run, which duties reach it, and what is outstanding. No obligation, and you keep the findings either way.
Book assessment