AI interaction notices
Define when a person must be told they are interacting with an AI system, then record the decision point.
For EU-facing AI products
Add a real disclosure path for AI interactions and synthetic content
Article 50 is where transparency becomes a product workflow. The current EU application date for these transparency rules is 2 August 2026. Veto helps teams trigger, approve, and record disclosure paths for AI interactions and generated content.
The Commission opened draft transparency-guideline feedback on 8 May 2026 and lists 3 June 2026 as the consultation close. Treat final guidance as pending. Veto supports operational implementation and recordkeeping; it does not replace legal advice.
Synthetic-content marking
Route generated or manipulated image, audio, video, and text through the right marking or label path before release.
Deepfake review flows
Pause review-required publication steps, collect human approval, and keep the evidence record with the content workflow.
The missing record
A disclosure path needs evidence showing when it fired and why.
Prompt instructions and product checklists do not create an auditable trail. Veto puts the disclosure decision in the same runtime path as the governed action, then records the rule, context, decision, timestamp, and approval context.
That lets product, legal, and security teams review the workflow as an evidence record instead of reconstructing intent from screenshots, logs, and scattered release notes.
For the broader risk and oversight mapping, use the EU AI Act evidence guide.
Article 50 FAQ
What is Article 50 of the EU AI Act?
Article 50 is the AI Act transparency section. It covers disclosures for people interacting with AI systems and marking or disclosure duties for certain AI-generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes and public-interest text. The Commission says the transparency rules become applicable on 2 August 2026.
How can Veto help with Article 50?
Veto does not decide your legal position. It gives product teams an operational layer: rules that decide when a disclosure path should fire, approvals for sensitive cases, and decision records showing what happened.
Is Article 50 only a disclosure-page problem?
No. The review point is product execution: whether a disclosure appeared, whether generated content was marked, who approved an exception, and whether the record can be shown later.
Which disclosure workflow should go first?
Begin with one user-facing workflow. Define the disclosure decision, wire it into the action path, run it in shadow mode, then export a decision record for legal and product review.