AI Act Compliance for Non-EU Companies
The Act applies to any organisation whose AI system affects people in the EU, regardless of where the company is based. Extraterritorial scope explained.
Read more →Practical guidance on EU AI Act compliance for businesses with customer-facing AI systems.
The Act applies to any organisation whose AI system affects people in the EU, regardless of where the company is based. Extraterritorial scope explained.
Read more →Social scoring, manipulative AI, real-time biometric surveillance — these prohibitions took effect in February 2025. Are you sure none of your systems qualify?
Read more →Providers of high-risk AI systems must supply deployers with detailed usage instructions. Most current documentation falls short of what the Act requires.
Read more →Article 72 requires ongoing surveillance of your AI system in production. Logging, drift detection, incident triggers — the compliance work doesn't stop at launch.
Read more →If your AI system causes harm, you have reporting obligations with tight timescales. What counts as a serious incident and who you need to notify.
Read more →Both regulate data, both carry massive fines, but they cover different ground. How to handle compliance for both without duplicating work.
Read more →If you've built a product on top of a foundation model, you inherit obligations. What GPAI transparency requirements mean for your wrapper.
Read more →Most mid-sized companies don't have a dedicated AI governance function. How to distribute responsibilities across legal, engineering, and product.
Read more →The Act references standards that haven't been written. How to demonstrate compliance in the gap between regulation and standardisation.
Read more →Every organisation using AI must ensure staff have sufficient AI literacy. What 'sufficient' means and how to document it.
Read more →