We'd like to set analytics cookies to measure which pages are useful. They are not needed to run the site, and declining changes nothing about what you can do here. Privacy Policy.
Article 50 is not hard to satisfy — it is hard to prove you satisfied it on a particular date, on a particular surface, in a particular language. This register is the evidence layer: what was live, where, when, and who signed it off.
Every template on this page is readable in full right here, copyable as Markdown, and downloadable as a PDF. No sign-up, no e-mail address, no click-to-reveal.
Not an official document. This is a working draft built from the text of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — it is not issued or endorsed by the European Commission, any national authority or any notified body, and it is not legal advice. Fill it in with your own facts and have it reviewed by counsel before you rely on it.
Whoever owns the surface. In practice a product or marketing owner per row, with a single accountable owner for the register as a whole. Note that Article 50 splits duties: paragraphs 1 and 2 bind providers, paragraphs 3 and 4 bind deployers.
Before the surface goes live, and updated whenever the wording, the surface or the languages change. Keep superseded rows rather than overwriting them — the question an authority asks is what was shown on a past date.
Article 50 has applied since 2 August 2026. Generative systems already on the market before that date have until 2 December 2026 for the Article 50(2) marking duty.
Article 50 — Article 50
Article 50 requires providers to ensure that systems interacting directly with natural persons inform them they are dealing with an AI system, and that synthetic audio, image, video or text is marked in a machine-readable way; it requires deployers to disclose deepfakes and to inform people exposed to emotion recognition or biometric categorisation. Article 50(5) fixes the timing: the information must be given in a clear and distinguishable manner at the latest at the time of the first interaction or exposure.
Relying on 'it is obvious it is a bot'. The carve-out in Article 50(1) is judged from the perspective of a reasonably well-informed, observant and circumspect person — and an assistant that writes like a colleague is exactly the case the paragraph was written for. A robot avatar is not a disclosure.
4 sections. Each one carries what to write and — the part templates normally leave out — what an assessor is looking for when they read it.
List every surface where your organisation interacts with people through AI, generates synthetic content, or reads people — including the ones you concluded are exempt, with the reason.
The exemptions. A register listing only the surfaces that carry a notice cannot show that the others were considered; a row reading 'exempt — obvious from context' with a dated reason can.
One row per surface per language. The notice text column holds the sentence you actually shipped, verbatim — not a description of it.
That the text in the register matches what is live on the surface today, and that the date-live column predates the first interaction the surface ever handled.
| Column | What to enter |
|---|---|
| Surface | Where the notice appears: chatbot widget, voice agent, generated image, support e-mail, hiring screen. |
| Article 50 paragraph | 50(1) interaction, 50(2) synthetic-content marking, 50(3) emotion recognition or biometric categorisation, 50(4) deepfake or public-interest text. |
| Duty holder | Provider for 50(1) and 50(2); deployer for 50(3) and 50(4). Record which hat you are wearing for this surface. |
| Notice text shipped | The exact wording, verbatim, per language. Paste it; do not summarise it. |
| Placement and timing | Where on the surface it sits and at what moment it is shown — Article 50(5) requires it at the latest at the first interaction or exposure. |
| Machine-readable marking | For generated content: the technique used to mark the output as artificially generated or manipulated, and its known limits. |
| Date live / date superseded | When this wording went live and, if replaced, when. Keep the old row. |
| Owner | The named person accountable for this surface. |
| Evidence | Screenshot, deployment reference or commit that shows the notice in place on the date claimed. |
For each surface where you concluded no disclosure is required, record which carve-out you relied on and why — obvious from context, assistive or non-substantially-altering editing, an evidently artistic or satirical work, or human editorial responsibility over published text.
Whether the carve-out was applied to the right paragraph. The exemptions are narrow and paragraph-specific; the editorial-responsibility carve-out for published text does not travel to a chatbot.
How often the register is checked against the live surfaces, who does it, and where the evidence is kept.
Evidence of a review that found something. A register reviewed quarterly with no change ever recorded across a year of shipping product suggests it was not really reviewed.
The same document in two portable forms. The Markdown pastes into Notion, Confluence, Google Docs or a repository; the PDF is laid out to be printed and written on, with ruled fill-in areas and a sign-off block.
# Article 50 AI disclosure register
**Legal basis:** Article 50 — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (EU AI Act).
> Not an official document. This is a working draft built from the text of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — it is not issued or endorsed by the European Commission, any national authority or any notified body, and it is not legal advice. Fill it in with your own facts and have it reviewed by counsel before you rely on it.
**Who fills this in:** Whoever owns the surface. In practice a product or marketing owner per row, with a single accountable owner for the register as a whole. Note that Article 50 splits duties: paragraphs 1 and 2 bind providers, paragraphs 3 and 4 bind deployers.
**When:** Before the surface goes live, and updated whenever the wording, the surface or the languages change. Keep superseded rows rather than overwriting them — the question an authority asks is what was shown on a past date.
| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Organisation | |
| AI system | |
| Version / reference | |
| Document owner | |
| Date | |
| Version of this document | |
## 1. Register scope
*What to write:* List every surface where your organisation interacts with people through AI, generates synthetic content, or reads people — including the ones you concluded are exempt, with the reason.
*What an auditor looks for:* The exemptions. A register listing only the surfaces that carry a notice cannot show that the others were considered; a row reading 'exempt — obvious from context' with a dated reason can.
_[Your text here]_
## 2. Register columns
*What to write:* One row per surface per language. The notice text column holds the sentence you actually shipped, verbatim — not a description of it.
*What an auditor looks for:* That the text in the register matches what is live on the surface today, and that the date-live column predates the first interaction the surface ever handled.
| Column | What to enter | Your entry |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Surface | Where the notice appears: chatbot widget, voice agent, generated image, support e-mail, hiring screen. | |
| Article 50 paragraph | 50(1) interaction, 50(2) synthetic-content marking, 50(3) emotion recognition or biometric categorisation, 50(4) deepfake or public-interest text. | |
| Duty holder | Provider for 50(1) and 50(2); deployer for 50(3) and 50(4). Record which hat you are wearing for this surface. | |
| Notice text shipped | The exact wording, verbatim, per language. Paste it; do not summarise it. | |
| Placement and timing | Where on the surface it sits and at what moment it is shown — Article 50(5) requires it at the latest at the first interaction or exposure. | |
| Machine-readable marking | For generated content: the technique used to mark the output as artificially generated or manipulated, and its known limits. | |
| Date live / date superseded | When this wording went live and, if replaced, when. Keep the old row. | |
| Owner | The named person accountable for this surface. | |
| Evidence | Screenshot, deployment reference or commit that shows the notice in place on the date claimed. | |
## 3. Exemptions claimed
*What to write:* For each surface where you concluded no disclosure is required, record which carve-out you relied on and why — obvious from context, assistive or non-substantially-altering editing, an evidently artistic or satirical work, or human editorial responsibility over published text.
*What an auditor looks for:* Whether the carve-out was applied to the right paragraph. The exemptions are narrow and paragraph-specific; the editorial-responsibility carve-out for published text does not travel to a chatbot.
_[Your text here]_
## 4. Review and evidence retention
*What to write:* How often the register is checked against the live surfaces, who does it, and where the evidence is kept.
*What an auditor looks for:* Evidence of a review that found something. A register reviewed quarterly with no change ever recorded across a year of shipping product suggests it was not really reviewed.
_[Your text here]_
---
Template by Conformly — getconformly.com/templates/article-50-disclosure-register. Free to copy and adapt. Not an official document. This is a working draft built from the text of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — it is not issued or endorsed by the European Commission, any national authority or any notified body, and it is not legal advice. Fill it in with your own facts and have it reviewed by counsel before you rely on it.
One row per AI system, with the columns the EU database will ask for — so the register you keep internally is the register you can file from.
The dossier you send to the market-surveillance authority, and the clock that starts the moment you become aware.
The nine-section technical file a provider of a high-risk AI system has to draw up before the system goes on the market.
Not sure this document is yours to write? Classify the system first — or browse all 7 templates.