isGenAI.com

Shareable EU AI Act Article 50 Implementation Report

https://example-ai-product.com

Generated 23 Oct 2026, 02:50. Scanner observations, the implementation work they point to, engineering actions, evidence requirements and explicit counsel-review markers, all in one shareable report. Technical evidence for counsel to act on, not legal advice.

Executive Summary

AI surfaces1
Code findings0
Review items7
Evidence readiness14%

Scope Matrix

EU AI Act Article 50(1)

Direct human-AI interaction disclosure

CUSTOMER FACTS REQUIRED

Public signals alone do not establish direct interaction; confirm it as a customer fact.

article-50-1-direct-interaction / effective 2026-08-02

EU AI Act Article 50(2)

Machine-readable marking and detection

NOT INDICATED

The Code-of-Practice path is not yet confirmed: the report keeps both Code and alternative-measures evidence visible.

article-50-2-machine-readable-marking / effective 2026-08-02

EU AI Act Article 50(3)

Emotion recognition and biometric categorisation notice

NOT INDICATED

No emotion recognition or biometric categorisation fact is currently indicated.

article-50-3-emotion-biometric-notice / effective 2026-08-02

EU AI Act Article 50(4)

Deepfake and public-interest content labelling

NOT INDICATED

Deepfake or public-interest publication facts are contextual: review them before any runtime control is disabled.

article-50-4-deepfake-public-interest / effective 2026-08-02

EU AI Act Article 50(5)

Accessible and context-appropriate labels

CUSTOMER FACTS REQUIRED

Every human-facing disclosure or label must be clear, distinguishable, accessible, and linked to the affected surface and policy version.

article-50-5-accessibility-context / effective 2026-08-02

Findings

EU AI Act Article 50(1)

Direct interaction disclosure

Status: COUNSEL REVIEW REQUIRED

Observation: REQUIRES LEGAL INTERPRETATION

Confidence: 76%

Rule/source version: article-50-1-direct-interaction / EU-AI-ARTICLE-50/2026.08

Recommended engineering action: Add a runtime disclosure component attached to every direct AI interaction surface, with locale and accessibility variants.

Evidence needed: Screenshot evidence, component version, policy rule version, route inventory, and release approval.

Counsel review: Required

EU AI Act Article 50(2)

Machine-readable marking of generated or manipulated content

Status: OUT OF SCOPE

Observation: UNABLE TO VERIFY EXTERNALLY

Confidence: 72%

Rule/source version: article-50-2-machine-readable-marking / EU-AI-ARTICLE-50/2026.08

Recommended engineering action: Use a marking adapter strategy: metadata or C2PA where appropriate, paired with signed evidence and a workflow-specific robustness suite.

Evidence needed: Artifact hash, adapter version, detection results, transformation tests, known limitations, and feasibility rationale.

Counsel review: Not required for this technical observation

EU AI Act Article 50(3)

Emotion recognition and biometric categorisation notice

Status: OUT OF SCOPE

Observation: UNABLE TO VERIFY EXTERNALLY

Confidence: 56%

Rule/source version: article-50-3-emotion-biometric-notice / EU-AI-ARTICLE-50/2026.08

Recommended engineering action: Maintain an exposed-person notice at first exposure to the operation of the system, linked to a privacy processing record and counsel-approved exception path.

Evidence needed: Workflow classification, notice copy version, first-exposure placement, exposure timestamp, DPIA or privacy record reference, and exception approval.

Counsel review: Not required for this technical observation

EU AI Act Article 50(4)

Deepfake and public-interest content labelling

Status: OUT OF SCOPE

Observation: UNABLE TO VERIFY EXTERNALLY

Confidence: 58%

Rule/source version: article-50-4-deepfake-public-interest / EU-AI-ARTICLE-50/2026.08

Recommended engineering action: Route relevant releases through a labelled publication workflow with reviewer sign-off and durable provenance.

Evidence needed: Use-case classification, reviewer approval, label text, publication timestamp, and exception record where used.

Counsel review: Not required for this technical observation

EU AI Act Article 50(5)

Accessible and machine-readable labelling context

Status: COUNSEL REVIEW REQUIRED

Observation: REQUIRES LEGAL INTERPRETATION

Confidence: 70%

Rule/source version: article-50-5-accessibility-context / EU-AI-ARTICLE-50/2026.08

Recommended engineering action: Maintain a label copy registry, per-surface policy bindings, and event-level evidence export.

Evidence needed: Copy version, surface binding, accessibility check, policy link, and exportable JSON evidence.

Counsel review: Required

Fix it with isGenAI

Generate the implementation kit, open a draft PR once GitHub write access is granted, run Transparency CI and export the audit packet.

AI Surface Inventory

mixed / unknown

Unclassified AI surface candidate

EU AI Act Article 50(1), EU AI Act Article 50(2), EU AI Act Article 50(3), EU AI Act Article 50(5)

Owner: Needs assignment

Role: unknown

Evidence: UNABLE TO VERIFY EXTERNALLY

Repository Findings

GitHub

No file-level findings in this report

Unable to verify externally

Connect GitHub or run the CI scanner to get exact repository paths and line numbers.

Public URL scans read public surfaces; private code needs the repository connection.

Generated Fixes

EU AI Act Article 50(1) / component

Add EU AI Act Article 50 first-interaction disclosure

Production-ready accessible disclosure component for direct human-AI interaction, with policy version and evidence hook props.

create: src/components/Article50Disclosure.tsx

EU AI Act Article 50(2) / middleware

Wrap generation with runtime evidence and marking configuration

Adds a TypeScript runtime wrapper that records policy decision, provenance node, sidecar metadata, and known marking limitations.

create: isgenai.runtime.ts

EU AI Act Article 50 / ci-check

Add Transparency CI report to pull requests

Runs repository signal detection on every pull request and uploads a machine-readable implementation report.

configure: .github/workflows/isgenai.yml

EU AI Act Article 50(3)/(4) / counsel-review

Record counsel determination before disabling controls

Creates an auditable override record for contextual determinations such as human editorial responsibility or obvious AI context.

create: isgenai.counsel-review.json

Observed Evidence

Signals

  • Target scan fell back to deterministic target-level analysis.

Limits

  • fetch failed
  • Authenticated pages, generated output files, private logs, and counsel interpretation are outside public scan scope.

Next actions

  • Complete the short product-context questionnaire for provider/deployer role and EU exposure.
  • Bind each detected AI surface to a versioned EU AI Act Article 50 policy rule.
  • Install the TypeScript runtime hook for one customer-facing generation workflow.
  • Generate a signed evidence envelope and run the first Transparency CI suite.