Labeling AI-generated images, audio, and video

Image, audio, and video generators are the cleanest Article 50(2) case: the output is synthetic, and the provider must mark it as machine-readable. If a deployer then publishes a deepfake, Article 50(4) adds a human-readable disclosure. The 2 December 2026 date is only a transition for 50(2) on systems that were already on the market before 2 August 2026.

Educational resource only — not legal advice. scm.cc publishes a readiness report and engineering gap analysis for AI features. It does not give legal advice, represent you before a regulator, or state that a product is ready to ship under any law. This page is educational product guidance, not legal advice. It is not a readiness report, not an engineering gap analysis of your systems, and not a determination that any product meets a legal duty. Confirm current official text before you ship.

Last checked against official sources: .

Provider work

Mark every export path — in-app preview, download, API, share link. A mark that exists only in your database is not a mark on the output. The official text allows for technical feasibility; it does not allow “we will add it next quarter” for a system you placed on the market after 2 August 2026.

Deployer work

If your customers publish the media, give them a default visible label and a way to mark artistic / satirical context. If you operate a public feed, you are often the deployer as well as the provider. See the deepfake page for the 50(4) exceptions.

AB 2013 sits beside the label

A generative image service made available to Californians also needs the § 3111 website documentation if you are the developer and the system was released or substantially modified on or after 1 January 2022. The label in the UI does not replace that post.

Questions teams ask

Do we watermark thumbnails?
Article 50(2) talks about the outputs of the system. If the thumbnail is a generated image, mark it. If it is a non-generated poster frame, do not invent a mark.
Is a style-transfer filter “standard editing”?
The 50(2) exception is for an assistive function for standard editing that does not substantially alter the input data or its semantics. A filter that replaces a face or invents a background is not standard editing. A brightness slider is.

Related pages

Back to the AI law hub

Primary sources

Official text wins. Last checked 2026-10-11. This page is educational product guidance, not legal advice. It is not a readiness report, not an engineering gap analysis of your systems, and not a determination that any product meets a legal duty. Confirm current official text before you ship.