EU AI Act Compliance Checker
Does your creative need an AI label? Drop in an image or video: we read the Content Credentials sealed inside it, ask four questions about what it shows, and tell you which EU AI Act duties apply to you.
What this check does
Article 50 puts two different duties on two different parties. Most of the confusion about AI labelling comes from treating them as one.
What it reads
Content Credentials
Content Credentials are a C2PA manifest embedded in the file itself, recording how the asset was made. They travel inside the file rather than sitting in a database, so anyone can check them without the producer's cooperation. Article 50(2) requires providers of generative AI systems to mark their output in a machine-readable format, and this is the mechanism most of the industry settled on.
What it can't
An unsigned file proves nothing
Most generative tools still do not sign their output, and the platforms people publish on routinely strip metadata on upload. A file with no credentials may be a photograph, or AI output from a tool that does not sign, or signed output that lost its manifest along the way. Absence tells you the file cannot prove its origin, and nothing more. This check will never tell you a file is not AI-generated.
Two duties
One is the provider's, one is yours
Article 50(2) falls on the provider of the AI system: outputs must be marked machine-readably as artificially generated. Article 50(4) falls on the deployer, the advertiser publishing the creative, and requires disclosure of content that constitutes a deep fake. They are separate duties on separate parties, and satisfying one does not satisfy the other.
The test
What counts as a deep fake
Article 3(60) sets a three-part test: the content resembles a person, object, place, entity or event; that subject exists, could plausibly exist, or could plausibly have existed; and the content would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful. All three have to hold.
The second part is looser than it sounds. A photorealistic portrait of an invented person still qualifies, because an invented person could plausibly exist. The third is where most advertising sits: a real product rendered photorealistically in a scene that never physically happened still presents to a viewer as a photograph. The Commission's guidelines are explicit that advertising does not qualify for the artistic or creative exemption.
Scope
Whether it applies to you
Article 2(1)(c) extends the Act to providers and deployers outside the EU where the output is used in the Union. The trigger is where your ads run, not where your company is registered. A US brand advertising to German consumers is in scope.
Limits
Information, not legal advice
This check reports what the Act says about what you described. It does not tell you that a creative is fine, because whether a given ad needs disclosure depends on how you publish it, the claims it makes and who sees it.
Read how Adsumo handles the AI Act for how we approach the same question on our own output.
