isGenAI.com

Shareable EU AI Act Article 50 Implementation Report

https://example-ai-product.com

Generated 7 Sept 2026, 16:03. This report contains scanner observations, likely implementation work, engineering actions, evidence needs, and explicit counsel-review markers. It is 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

The scan cannot determine direct interaction from public signals alone.

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 confirmed, so 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 and should be reviewed before runtime controls are 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

Any human-facing disclosure or label should 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 with isgenai.com

Generate the implementation kit, open a draft PR when GitHub write access is available, 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 for exact repository paths and lines.

Public URL scans cannot inspect private code.

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.