1. Providers shall ensure that AI systems intended to interact directly with natural persons are designed and developed in such a way that the natural persons concerned are informed that they are interacting with an AI system, unless this is obvious from the point of view of a natural person who is reasonably well-informed, observant and circumspect, taking into account the circumstances and the context of use. ... 3. Deployers of an emotion recognition system or a biometric categorisation system shall inform the natural persons exposed thereto of the operation of the system, and shall process the personal data in accordance with Regulations (EU) 2016/679 and (EU) 2018/1725 and Directive (EU) 2016/680, as applicable. ... 4. Deployers of an AI system that generates or manipulates image, audio or video content constituting a deep fake, shall disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated. ... Deployers of an AI system that generates or manipulates text which is published with the purpose of informing the public on matters of public interest shall disclose that the text has been artificially generated or manipulated. This obligation shall not apply ... where the AI-generated content has undergone a process of human review or editorial control and where a natural or legal person holds editorial responsibility for the publication of the content. 5. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 shall be provided to the natural persons concerned in a clear and distinguishable manner at the latest at the time of the first interaction or exposure. The information shall conform to the applicable accessibility requirements.
How this was checked
Transparency duties
Verified · last checked Settled, with the evidence a claim at this level needs.
Under the EU AI Act, systems intended to interact directly with people must be designed so that those people are informed they are dealing with an AI system, unless that is obvious to a reasonably well-informed and observant person in the circumstances. Deployers of an emotion recognition or biometric categorisation system must inform the people exposed to it. Deployers of a system that generates or manipulates image, audio or video content constituting a deep fake must disclose that the content is artificially generated or manipulated, and deployers publishing AI-generated text to inform the public on matters of public interest must disclose that too, unless the text went through human review and a person or company holds editorial responsibility for it. The information must be given clearly and distinguishably, at the latest at the time of the first interaction or exposure.
At a glance
The statement laid out, in its own words. The statement above and its sources are what count.
Who must tell whom
| Use | Duty | Unless |
|---|---|---|
| A system intended to interact directly with people | Designed so those people are informed they are dealing with an AI system | That is obvious to a reasonably well-informed and observant person in the circumstances |
| Emotion recognition or biometric categorisation | The deployer informs the people exposed to it | - |
| Image, audio or video content constituting a deep fake | The deployer discloses that it is artificially generated or manipulated | - |
| AI-generated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest | The deployer discloses it | It went through human review and a person or company holds editorial responsibility for it |
How and when
- Clearly and distinguishably
- at the latest at the time of the first interaction or exposure
Where the book relies on it
- The AI Act File, Telling people they are dealing with a machine. About The AI Act File
- Kind of evidence
- documentarySettled by a first-hand source, quoted below with the day it was read.
The evidence
(30) [The system must fulfil the elements of the AI system definition,] which excludes simple non-AI automated response mechanisms (e.g., traditional out-of-office emails, rule-based quick message answers). (131) [Examples of text which is not published with the purpose of informing the public on matters of public interest:] AI-manipulated text that is part of a company's advertisement or product descriptions (not including any claims related to e.g. health, consumer safety or sustainability). (134) Human review refers to the deliberate examination of the substance of the content by one or more natural persons possessing relevant knowledge and professional judgement pertaining to the subject matter under scrutiny [...]. Fact-checking the accuracy of the content is a minimum requirement that should be part of that review. (135) Superficial, solely formal or procedural checks (e.g. spell-checking or grammatical correction), the mere existence of an editorial policy, automated review processes or cursory editorial approval without substantive engagement by the human reviewer or the editorial entity, cannot fulfil the conditions for human review or editorial control for the purposes of this exception. (136) [...] Any substantive AI intervention occurring after the human review or editorial control process has taken place will therefore cause the exception to become void.
Every sentence in our books that makes a claim about the world points at a page like this one.