{"data":{"generatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:20:00+02:00","stories":[{"id":"story-eu-enforcement","slug":"eu-ai-act-enters-enforcement-phase","eyebrow":"Enforcement shift","headline":"EU AI Act Article 50 duties enter the enforcement phase","summary":"The AI Office and national authorities can enforce the Act as Article 50 transparency duties apply from 2 August 2026. Immediate compliance work covers machine-readable marking and the remaining high-risk timetable.","publishedAt":"2026-08-02","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"EU","questionSlug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","eventSlug":"eu-article-50-enforcement-begins","sourceIds":["source-european-commission","source-reed-smith","source-eu-ai-act"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-eu-machine"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-ai-act-article-50"],"sourceCount":3,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"critical","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":100,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["European Commission","Reed Smith","EU AI Act"],"blindspot":"Coverage is specialist and government-heavy; mainstream political framing of Article 50 duties remains sparse.","verifiedClaim":"Article 50 applies from 2 August 2026; AI-generated or altered content is subject to machine-readable marking duties.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-starts-enforcing-ai-act-rules-and-new-transparency-requirements-2-august"},{"id":"story-us-datacenter","slug":"ai-data-center-moratorium-proposal","eyebrow":"New policy ask","headline":"A federal AI data-centre moratorium enters the US debate","summary":"H.R. 9442 introduces a direct growth-control ask into Congress. Its significance lies less in near-term passage than in linking AI capacity to electricity, water and national-security constraints.","publishedAt":"2026-06-24","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United States","questionSlug":"should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls","eventSlug":"hr-9442-introduced","sourceIds":["source-congress","source-dcd"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr9442-moratorium","ev-hr9442-reporting"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","alexandria-ocasio-cortez"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act"],"sourceCount":2,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"developing","significance":"notable","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":100,"industry":100,"mainstream":25,"critical":25},"sourceNames":["Congress.gov","Data Center Dynamics"],"blindspot":"Coverage is concentrated in bill text, energy-trade specialist reporting, sponsor press and niche political outlets; large national center-right and business press remains sparse relative to that specialist and niche track.","verifiedClaim":"H.R. 9442 was introduced on 24 June 2026 and referred to House Energy and Commerce and Foreign Affairs.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442"},{"id":"story-iea-datacentres","slug":"iea-data-centre-electricity-surge","eyebrow":"Energy measurement","headline":"IEA: data-centre electricity demand grew 17% in 2025","summary":"The IEA’s Key Questions on Energy and AI executive summary reports 17% growth in data-centre electricity demand in 2025 and 50% growth for AI-focused centres, with a central projection near 950 TWh by 2030.","publishedAt":"2026-06-01","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","questionSlug":"should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls","eventSlug":"iea-key-questions-energy-ai-published","sourceIds":["source-iea"],"evidenceIds":["ev-iea-demand-2025","ev-iea-2030-projection"],"actorSlugs":["international-energy-agency"],"vehicleSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":100,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["International Energy Agency"],"blindspot":"National grid-operator series can diverge from IEA global totals; measurement definitions differ across those coverage tracks.","verifiedClaim":"Global data-centre electricity demand grew by 17% in 2025; AI-focused data centres grew 50%.","sourceUrl":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary"},{"id":"story-cn-agents","slug":"china-agent-governance-guidance","eyebrow":"Governance signal","headline":"China sets a policy direction for autonomous AI agents","summary":"New guidance frames agents as systems with perception, memory, decision and execution capabilities, pairing deployment goals with standards, certification and lifecycle governance.","publishedAt":"2026-05-08","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"China","questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","eventSlug":"china-agent-guidance-issued","sourceIds":["source-cac","source-xinhua","source-yicai"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cac-agents","ev-cac-agents-definition","ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","ev-cac-agents-graded-governance"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"sourceCount":3,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":100,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["CAC","Xinhua","Yicai"],"blindspot":"English-language comparative coverage of standards and certification paths remains thin relative to Chinese official text.","verifiedClaim":"The opinions define AI agents by autonomous perception, memory, decision, interaction and execution, and treat safety, reliability and trustworthiness as a baseline across research, deployment and promotion.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm"},{"id":"story-us-transparency","slug":"us-foundation-model-transparency-bill","eyebrow":"Bill introduced","headline":"US proposal would put foundation-model disclosure under the FTC","summary":"H.R. 8094 asks the Federal Trade Commission to establish public-information requirements covering foundation-model training data and algorithms. The vehicle remains at the introduced stage.","publishedAt":"2026-03-26","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United States","questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","eventSlug":"hr-8094-introduced","sourceIds":["source-congress","source-alston","source-govtrack"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr8094-transparency"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","don-beyer","federal-trade-commission"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-8094-ai-foundation-model-transparency-act"],"sourceCount":3,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"corroborated","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":100,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["Congress.gov","Alston & Bird","GovTrack"],"blindspot":"Debate coverage often collapses training-data disclosure with model-evaluation mandates; the bill text treats them as distinct information requirements.","verifiedClaim":"The introduced bill directs the FTC to establish requirements for public information about foundation-model training data and algorithms.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr8094/BILLS-119hr8094ih.htm"},{"id":"story-korea-basic","slug":"korea-ai-basic-act-in-force","eyebrow":"Statute in force","headline":"Korea’s AI Basic Act takes effect with labelling and safety duties","summary":"MSIT announced that the AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree took effect on 22 January 2026. The package includes generative-AI labelling duties and a grace period of at least one year for most penalties.","publishedAt":"2026-01-22","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"South Korea","questionSlug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","eventSlug":"korea-ai-basic-act-effective","sourceIds":["source-msit-korea"],"evidenceIds":["ev-korea-effective","ev-korea-labelling"],"actorSlugs":["korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict"],"vehicleSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"critical","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["MSIT"],"blindspot":"Korean gazette text is authoritative; MSIT English announcement coverage does not substitute for it.","verifiedClaim":"The AI Basic Act comes into effect on 22 January 2026; the Enforcement Decree requires clear labelling of generative AI outputs including deepfakes.","sourceUrl":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng"},{"id":"story-c2pa","slug":"c2pa-content-credentials-standard","eyebrow":"Technical standard","headline":"C2PA’s Content Credentials remain the open provenance baseline","summary":"C2PA Specification 2.3 defines a technical standard for content provenance and authenticity. Whether governments should mandate it is a separate ask.","publishedAt":"2026-01-08","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United States","questionSlug":"should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory","eventSlug":"c2pa-spec-2-3-published","sourceIds":["source-c2pa","source-content-credentials"],"evidenceIds":["ev-c2pa-purpose"],"actorSlugs":["coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity"],"vehicleSlugs":["c2pa-content-credentials-spec"],"sourceCount":2,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"notable","coverage":{"government":0,"specialist":100,"industry":100,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["C2PA","Content Credentials"],"blindspot":"Legal mandates that cite C2PA remain sparse relative to voluntary-adoption coverage.","verifiedClaim":"C2PA developed a technical specification for providing content provenance and authenticity.","sourceUrl":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html"},{"id":"story-ca-sb53","slug":"california-frontier-ai-transparency-act","eyebrow":"State statute in force","headline":"California requires large frontier developers to publish safety frameworks","summary":"SB 53, chaptered in September 2025, took effect on 1 January 2026 as Business and Professions Code Chapter 25.1. Covered large frontier developers must publish a frontier AI framework and related transparency reports.","publishedAt":"2026-01-01","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"California","questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","eventSlug":"california-sb53-effective","sourceIds":["source-california-leginfo"],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-framework","ev-sb53-effective"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature","scott-wiener","california-office-of-emergency-services"],"vehicleSlugs":["california-sb-53-tfiaa"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"critical","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":50,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["California Legislative Information"],"blindspot":"Post-effective compliance-practice coverage remains thinner than chaptering and statute-text coverage.","verifiedClaim":"A large frontier developer shall write, implement, comply with, and clearly and conspicuously publish on its internet website a frontier AI framework.","sourceUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title="},{"id":"story-eu-gpai-code","slug":"eu-gpai-code-of-practice","eyebrow":"Compliance tool","headline":"EU publishes a voluntary GPAI Code of Practice for AI Act duties","summary":"On 10 July 2025 the Commission announced receipt of the final General-Purpose AI Code of Practice. The code covers transparency and copyright for all GPAI providers and safety/security for systemic-risk models.","publishedAt":"2025-07-10","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"EU","questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","eventSlug":"eu-gpai-code-published","sourceIds":["source-european-commission"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-gpai-code"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-of-practice"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["European Commission"],"blindspot":"Signatory uptake and post-endorsement practice remain the live dispute after the July 2025 final text.","verifiedClaim":"The European Commission received the final General-Purpose AI Code of Practice on 10 July 2025 as a voluntary compliance tool.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available"},{"id":"story-japan-promotion","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act","eyebrow":"Promotion statute","headline":"Japan enacts an AI promotion statute with guideline duties","summary":"Act No. 53 of 2025 frames AI-related technology as foundational and directs the national government to establish guidelines aligned with international norms.","publishedAt":"2025-06-04","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"Japan","questionSlug":"should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans","eventSlug":"japan-ai-promotion-act-enacted","sourceIds":["source-japan-law-translation"],"evidenceIds":["ev-japan-purpose","ev-japan-guidelines"],"actorSlugs":["japan-cabinet-office"],"vehicleSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":0,"industry":0,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["Japanese Law Translation"],"blindspot":"Japanese gazette and guideline text remains the operative authority; English translation coverage trails that primary track.","verifiedClaim":"The national government is to establish guidelines in accordance with the purport of the international norms.","sourceUrl":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en"},{"id":"story-bis-controls","slug":"us-advanced-computing-export-controls","eyebrow":"Export control","headline":"BIS tightens EAR controls on advanced computing chips","summary":"A 16 January 2025 interim final rule revises Export Administration Regulations covering advanced computing integrated circuits used in AI datacentre contexts.","publishedAt":"2025-01-16","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United States","questionSlug":"should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls","eventSlug":"bis-advanced-computing-ifr-effective","sourceIds":["source-govinfo","source-bis"],"evidenceIds":["ev-bis-ear"],"actorSlugs":["bureau-of-industry-and-security"],"vehicleSlugs":["bis-advanced-computing-ifr-jan-2025"],"sourceCount":2,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"critical","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["GovInfo","BIS"],"blindspot":"Partner licence practice and later amendments shape real export outcomes beyond the interim final rule text.","verifiedClaim":"BIS revised the EAR regarding advanced computing integrated circuits in the 16 January 2025 interim final rule.","sourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm"},{"id":"story-coe-convention","slug":"coe-ai-framework-convention","eyebrow":"Treaty opened","headline":"Council of Europe opens a binding AI human-rights treaty for signature","summary":"CETS No. 225 aims to keep AI lifecycle activities consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Entry into force still depends on the five-party threshold in Article 30.","publishedAt":"2024-09-05","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","questionSlug":"should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties","eventSlug":"coe-framework-convention-opened","sourceIds":["source-coe"],"evidenceIds":["ev-coe-aim","ev-coe-eif"],"actorSlugs":["council-of-europe-committee-on-ai"],"vehicleSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-ai"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"critical","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":0,"critical":50},"sourceNames":["Council of Europe"],"blindspot":"Signature volume exceeds ratification; Treaty Office tallies show one ratification (EU) as of mid-2026, below the entry-into-force threshold.","verifiedClaim":"The Convention aims to ensure AI lifecycle activities are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"},{"id":"story-oecd-2024","slug":"oecd-ai-principles-2024-revision","eyebrow":"Soft-law update","headline":"OECD revises its AI Recommendation and shared system definition","summary":"On 3 May 2024 the OECD Council revised the Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence. The instrument remains soft law, but its AI-system definition is widely reused in domestic drafting.","publishedAt":"2024-05-03","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","questionSlug":"should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules","eventSlug":"oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-2024","sourceIds":["source-oecd-legal","source-oecd"],"evidenceIds":["ev-oecd-definition","ev-oecd-revision-date"],"actorSlugs":["oecd-council"],"vehicleSlugs":["oecd-recommendation-on-ai"],"sourceCount":2,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["OECD Legal Instruments","OECD.AI"],"blindspot":"Domestic incorporation of the 2024 revision remains uneven across adherents.","verifiedClaim":"The OECD Recommendation defines an AI system as a machine-based system that infers how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"},{"id":"story-uk-principles","slug":"uk-regulator-led-ai-principles","eyebrow":"Institutional design","headline":"UK keeps AI principles with existing regulators, not an early statute","summary":"The March 2023 white paper states the five AI principles will start on a non-statutory basis and be implemented by existing regulators.","publishedAt":"2023-03-29","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","questionSlug":"should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules","eventSlug":"uk-ai-white-paper-published","sourceIds":["source-uk-dsit"],"evidenceIds":["ev-uk-principles"],"actorSlugs":["uk-department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"],"vehicleSlugs":["uk-ai-regulation-white-paper"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["UK DSIT"],"blindspot":"Later legislative hardening proposals sit outside the 2023 white paper text that this coverage quotes.","verifiedClaim":"The UK white paper keeps the principles non-statutory initially and assigns implementation to existing regulators.","sourceUrl":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper"},{"id":"story-nist-rmf","slug":"nist-ai-rmf-voluntary-baseline","eyebrow":"Standards baseline","headline":"NIST keeps the AI Risk Management Framework voluntary","summary":"NIST’s AI RMF, released on 26 January 2023, remains a voluntary organisational tool. Later profiles address generative AI and critical infrastructure without converting the core framework into a statute.","publishedAt":"2023-01-26","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"United States","questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","eventSlug":"nist-ai-rmf-released","sourceIds":["source-nist"],"evidenceIds":["ev-nist-voluntary"],"actorSlugs":["national-institute-of-standards-and-technology"],"vehicleSlugs":["nist-ai-risk-management-framework"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"high","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["NIST"],"blindspot":"Contractual and sectoral mandates that cite the RMF vary by sector; the framework text itself stays voluntary.","verifiedClaim":"The NIST AI Risk Management Framework is intended for voluntary use.","sourceUrl":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework"},{"id":"story-unesco-ethics","slug":"unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","eyebrow":"Global ethics standard","headline":"UNESCO’s AI ethics recommendation remains the global soft-law baseline","summary":"In November 2021, 193 UNESCO Member States adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. The live dispute is national implementation, not the fact of adoption.","publishedAt":"2021-11-01","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","questionSlug":"should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","eventSlug":"unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation-adopted","sourceIds":["source-unesco"],"evidenceIds":["ev-unesco-adoption"],"actorSlugs":["unesco-member-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["unesco-recommendation-ethics-of-ai"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"notable","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":0,"mainstream":0,"critical":50},"sourceNames":["UNESCO"],"blindspot":"National implementation varies widely; adoption does not equal domestic enforceability.","verifiedClaim":"In November 2021, UNESCO's 193 Member States adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.","sourceUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"},{"id":"story-singapore-framework","slug":"singapore-model-ai-governance-framework","eyebrow":"Voluntary framework","headline":"Singapore keeps AI governance on a voluntary model framework","summary":"IMDA’s Model AI Governance Framework second edition remains a voluntary ready-to-use tool for organisational AI governance.","publishedAt":"2020-01-21","updatedAt":"2026-08-11T20:30:00+02:00","jurisdiction":"Singapore","questionSlug":"should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules","eventSlug":"singapore-model-framework-2nd-ed","sourceIds":["source-imda"],"evidenceIds":["ev-imda-voluntary"],"actorSlugs":["singapore-imda"],"vehicleSlugs":["singapore-model-ai-governance-framework"],"sourceCount":1,"primarySourceCount":1,"status":"verified","significance":"notable","coverage":{"government":100,"specialist":50,"industry":50,"mainstream":0,"critical":0},"sourceNames":["IMDA"],"blindspot":"Later agentic-AI factsheets extend the toolkit beyond the second-edition Model Framework.","verifiedClaim":"Singapore’s Model Framework is a voluntary, ready-to-use tool.","sourceUrl":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf"}],"questions":[{"id":"q-ai-content-disclosure","slug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","question":"Should AI-generated content be labelled?","dek":"Governments require disclosure in different forms. Technical duties, responsible actors and enforcement models still diverge.","category":"Content integrity","jurisdictions":["EU","China","United States"],"status":"fragmenting","confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-machine-readable","slug":"machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","text":"Require machine-readable marking of AI-generated or altered content","summary":"Require covered providers to attach detectable technical provenance markers to synthetic or materially altered content.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"In force","detail":"Article 50 marking duties apply from 2 August 2026, subject to a limited legacy-system grace period.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"In force","detail":"The AI-generated synthetic content labelling measures apply from 1 September 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"AI Act · Article 50","type":"Regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Applicable","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"name":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"China","status":"In force","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Implements machine-readable marking through Article 50."},{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Requires covered providers to apply explicit and implicit labels."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-machine","ev-cn-date","ev-convergence"]},{"id":"ask-visible-label","slug":"visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","text":"Require visible disclosure for deepfakes and public-interest synthetic media","summary":"Require people encountering covered synthetic media to receive a clear, visible disclosure rather than relying only on hidden metadata.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"In force","detail":"Article 50 disclosure duties apply to deepfakes and specified public-interest text.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"In force","detail":"Covered synthetic content is subject to labelling measures in force since September 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"AI Act · Article 50","type":"Regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Applicable","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"name":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"China","status":"In force","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Requires disclosure for covered deepfakes and synthetic public-interest content."},{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Requires labelling by covered synthetic-content service providers."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-cn-date","ev-korea-labelling"]},{"id":"ask-korea-transparency","slug":"korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties","text":"Require advance notice and clear labelling for generative and high-impact AI","summary":"Require AI business operators providing high-impact or generative AI to inform users in advance and clearly label generative outputs, including deepfakes.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"South Korea","state":"In force","detail":"MSIT states the AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree took effect on 22 January 2026, with at least a one-year grace period for most penalties.","sourceUrl":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Korea AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"South Korea","status":"In force","url":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Ministry of Science and ICT (Korea)","stance":"support","summary":"Implements transparency and labelling duties under the AI Basic Act package."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-korea-effective","ev-korea-labelling"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","actorType":"government","stance":"support","summary":"Enforcing disclosure to users, deepfake labels, and machine-readable marks.","evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-eu-machine"],"asOf":"2026-08-02"},{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","actorType":"government","stance":"support","summary":"Requires labelling activity by covered synthetic-content service providers.","evidenceIds":["ev-cn-date"],"asOf":"2025-09-01"}],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-frontier-evals","slug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","dek":"Evaluation language is widespread in policy texts. Thresholds, evaluators and legal consequences remain contested.","category":"Frontier safety","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"],"status":"contested","confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-foundation-disclosure","slug":"foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules","text":"Require public disclosure rules for foundation-model training data, testing and operations","summary":"Direct a federal regulator to establish public-information requirements covering training data, documentation, testing, inference-time collection and model operations for covered foundation models.","status":"introduced","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Introduced","detail":"H.R. 8094 was introduced on 26 March 2026 and directs the FTC to establish foundation-model disclosure requirements.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr8094/BILLS-119hr8094ih.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"H.R. 8094 · AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026","type":"Bill","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Introduced","url":"https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr8094/BILLS-119hr8094ih.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Rep. Don Beyer","stance":"support","summary":"Sponsored the House bill directing FTC foundation-model disclosure rules."},{"actor":"United States Congress","stance":"unclear","summary":"The bill remains at the introduced stage pending committee action."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr8094-transparency"]},{"id":"ask-agent-lifecycle","slug":"lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents","text":"Require lifecycle safety governance for autonomous AI agents","summary":"Treat safety, reliability and trustworthiness as requirements across research, deployment and promotion of AI agents with autonomous capabilities.","status":"proposed","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"Policy guidance issued","detail":"CAC, NDRC and MIIT jointly issued implementation opinions on AI-agent development and lifecycle governance on 8 May 2026.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Implementation Opinions on Standardized Application and Innovative Development of AI Agents","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"China","status":"Issued","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer of the national AI-agent implementation opinions."},{"actor":"National Development and Reform Commission","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer linking agent development to national planning priorities."},{"actor":"Ministry of Industry and Information Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer of the agent standards and industry-development guidance."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-cac-agents","ev-cac-agents-definition","ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","ev-cac-agents-graded-governance"]},{"id":"ask-frontier-frameworks","slug":"frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks","text":"Require large frontier developers to publish catastrophic-risk safety frameworks","summary":"Require covered large frontier developers to write, implement, comply with and publish a frontier AI framework covering catastrophic-risk assessment, mitigations and related disclosures.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"California","state":"In force","detail":"California Business and Professions Code Chapter 25.1 took effect on 1 January 2026.","sourceUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title="}],"vehicles":[{"name":"California SB 53 · Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"California","status":"In force","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title="}],"positions":[{"actor":"California Legislature","stance":"support","summary":"Enacted SB 53 as Chapter 138, Statutes of 2025."},{"actor":"Sen. Scott Wiener","stance":"support","summary":"Authored the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-framework","ev-sb53-effective"]},{"id":"ask-nist-rmf","slug":"voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks","text":"Use voluntary AI risk-management frameworks for organisational governance","summary":"Adopt voluntary frameworks such as the NIST AI RMF to manage trustworthiness risks without treating the framework text as a statute.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published","detail":"NIST released AI RMF 1.0 on 26 January 2023 for voluntary use.","sourceUrl":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"NIST AI Risk Management Framework","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework"}],"positions":[{"actor":"National Institute of Standards and Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and maintains the voluntary AI RMF and related profiles."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-nist-voluntary"]},{"id":"ask-gpai-code","slug":"gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path","text":"Offer a voluntary code of practice for general-purpose AI Act compliance","summary":"Provide a multi-stakeholder code that GPAI providers may use to demonstrate compliance with AI Act transparency, copyright and systemic-risk duties.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Published","detail":"The Commission received the final GPAI Code of Practice on 10 July 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Published","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Received and later assessed the Code as an adequate voluntary compliance tool."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-gpai-code"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-data-centers","slug":"should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls","question":"Should AI data centres face growth controls?","dek":"Electricity, water, local consent and national competitiveness are turning compute infrastructure into a policy fight.","category":"Compute & energy","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"],"status":"emerging","confidence":"developing","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-datacenter-moratorium","slug":"moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres","text":"Pause new large AI data centres pending resource and security review","summary":"Pause construction or upgrading of covered AI data centres until Congress enacts specified safeguards and expressly terminates the moratorium.","status":"introduced","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Introduced","detail":"H.R. 9442 was introduced on 24 June 2026 and referred to two House committees.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"H.R. 9442 · Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act","type":"Bill","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Introduced","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez","stance":"support","summary":"Introduced the House bill establishing the proposed moratorium."},{"actor":"United States Congress","stance":"unclear","summary":"The bill remains at the introduced stage pending committee action."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr9442-moratorium","ev-hr9442-reporting","ev-iea-demand-2025"]},{"id":"ask-electricity-projections","slug":"publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections","text":"Publish authoritative AI data-centre electricity demand projections","summary":"Maintain public, method-stated projections of data-centre and AI-focused electricity demand for grid and infrastructure planning.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published (IEA analysis)","detail":"The IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI executive summary updates 2025 growth and 2030 projections. IEA is an intergovernmental agency; the report is not UN law.","sourceUrl":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI","type":"Official analysis","status":"Published","url":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary"}],"positions":[{"actor":"International Energy Agency","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes recurring measurement of data-centre and AI electricity demand."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-iea-demand-2025","ev-iea-2030-projection"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-intergovernmental-principles","slug":"should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules","question":"Should intergovernmental AI principles guide national rules?","dek":"Soft-law instruments such as the OECD AI Recommendation supply shared definitions that many jurisdictions then incorporate, revise or ignore.","category":"Multilateral standards","jurisdictions":["EU","United States","United Kingdom","Japan"],"status":"settling","confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:20:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-oecd-definition","slug":"adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles","text":"Adopt the OECD AI-system definition and trustworthy-AI principles","summary":"Use the OECD Recommendation’s AI-system definition and principles as a shared baseline for domestic policy and legislative drafting.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"EU instruments often reuse OECD vocabulary. The Recommendation itself is OECD soft law, not EU legislation.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"},{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"US frameworks frequently cite OECD definitions without making them binding federal statute.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"},{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"Japan’s promotion and guidelines approach cites international norms, including OECD-style principles.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence","type":"Recommendation","status":"In force (soft law)","url":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"}],"positions":[{"actor":"OECD Council","stance":"support","summary":"Adopted the Recommendation in 2019 and revised it in May 2024."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-oecd-definition","ev-oecd-revision-date"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-unesco-ethics","slug":"should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","question":"Should states implement UNESCO’s AI ethics recommendation?","dek":"UNESCO’s 2021 recommendation is a global ethics standard; the open policy question is how far states turn its principles into domestic duties.","category":"Ethics & rights","jurisdictions":["EU","United States","United Kingdom","Brazil"],"status":"contested","confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:20:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-unesco-implement","slug":"implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","text":"Implement UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","summary":"Translate the UNESCO ethics recommendation’s values, principles and policy action areas into national law, guidance or institutional practice.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Implementation contested","detail":"193 UNESCO Member States adopted the recommendation in November 2021. Domestic implementation remains the open question for EU members and others.","sourceUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"},{"jurisdiction":"Brazil","state":"Implementation contested","detail":"National follow-up, not UNESCO membership alone, determines whether recommendation principles become domestic duties.","sourceUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","type":"Recommendation","status":"Adopted","url":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"}],"positions":[{"actor":"UNESCO Member States","stance":"support","summary":"Adopted the recommendation as the first global UNESCO AI ethics standard."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-unesco-adoption"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-coe-treaty","slug":"should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties","question":"Should states join binding AI human-rights treaties?","dek":"The Council of Europe Framework Convention is open for signature. The live dispute is ratification and domestic effect, not whether a treaty text exists.","category":"Multilateral standards","jurisdictions":["EU","United Kingdom","United States","Japan"],"status":"emerging","confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-coe-ratify","slug":"ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai","text":"Sign and ratify the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence","summary":"Express consent to be bound by CETS No. 225 so the Convention’s human-rights, democracy and rule-of-law duties apply to the Party.","status":"proposed","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"Opened for signature on 5 September 2024. Entry into force needs five parties including three Council of Europe member States. EU and member-state ratification tracks are separate from the treaty text itself.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"},{"jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"UK signature and ratification status must be checked against the Treaty Office, not assumed from openness of the instrument.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"},{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"Non-member States of the Council of Europe may also become Parties under the Convention’s accession rules.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"CoE Framework Convention on AI (CETS No. 225)","type":"Treaty","status":"Opened for signature","url":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Council of Europe Committee on Artificial Intelligence","stance":"support","summary":"Drafted and advanced the Framework Convention text."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-coe-aim","ev-coe-eif"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-export-controls","slug":"should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls","question":"Should advanced AI chips face export controls?","dek":"US export controls already treat advanced computing integrated circuits as regulated items. The dispute is scope, partners and effectiveness.","category":"Geopolitics & compute","jurisdictions":["United States","China","EU","Japan","South Korea"],"status":"settling","confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-ear-controls","slug":"control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear","text":"Control advanced computing integrated circuits under export administration rules","summary":"Use Export Administration Regulations revisions to licence or restrict advanced computing ICs used in AI datacentre deployments.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"In force","detail":"BIS interim final rule FR 2025-00711 took effect on 16 January 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"BIS advanced computing IC interim final rule","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"In force","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Bureau of Industry and Security","stance":"support","summary":"Issued the January 2025 EAR revisions on advanced computing ICs."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-bis-ear"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-promotion-statutes","slug":"should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans","question":"Should states prefer AI promotion statutes to horizontal bans?","dek":"Japan’s Act No. 53 of 2025 promotes AI development and directs guidelines. Whether that model outcompetes bans-heavy statutes remains contested.","category":"Institutional design","jurisdictions":["Japan","South Korea","United Kingdom","United States","EU"],"status":"contested","confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-japan-promotion","slug":"enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes","text":"Enact AI promotion statutes that direct national guidelines","summary":"Pass promotion-focused AI legislation that treats AI as foundational technology and requires government guidelines aligned with international norms.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"In force","detail":"Act No. 53 of 2025 is published on Japanese Law Translation.","sourceUrl":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Japan AI Promotion Act","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"Japan","status":"In force","url":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Cabinet Office of Japan","stance":"support","summary":"Coordinates promotion policy around the 2025 AI statute."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-japan-purpose","ev-japan-guidelines"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-watermarking","slug":"should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory","question":"Should watermarking standards be mandatory?","dek":"Open provenance standards such as C2PA already exist. The dispute is whether law should require them or leave adoption voluntary.","category":"Content integrity","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","China","South Korea"],"status":"contested","confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-c2pa","slug":"adopt-open-content-provenance-standards","text":"Adopt open content-provenance standards such as C2PA Content Credentials","summary":"Use open technical specifications for content provenance and authenticity assertions in synthetic-media governance.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published (voluntary)","detail":"C2PA Specification 2.3 defines the Content Credentials technical standard.","sourceUrl":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"C2PA Content Credentials specification","type":"Standard","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and maintains the C2PA technical specification."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-c2pa-purpose"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]},{"id":"q-sector-regulators","slug":"should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules","question":"Should sector regulators own AI rules instead of a horizontal act?","dek":"The UK white paper and Singapore’s Model Framework both privilege existing regulators or voluntary tools over an early omnibus AI Act.","category":"Institutional design","jurisdictions":["United Kingdom","Singapore","United States","EU","Canada"],"status":"contested","confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-08-10T18:30:00+02:00","asks":[{"id":"ask-uk-regulators","slug":"implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators","text":"Implement AI principles through existing regulators on a non-statutory basis first","summary":"Issue cross-cutting AI principles without immediate statute and assign implementation to existing sector regulators.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","state":"Published","detail":"The March 2023 white paper keeps principles non-statutory initially.","sourceUrl":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"UK AI regulation white paper","type":"Policy paper","jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","status":"Published","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper"}],"positions":[{"actor":"UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Published the pro-innovation white paper assigning principles to existing regulators."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-uk-principles"]},{"id":"ask-singapore-framework","slug":"publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks","text":"Publish voluntary national AI governance frameworks for organisations","summary":"Issue ready-to-use voluntary frameworks covering explainability, transparency, fairness and human-centric AI use.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"Singapore","state":"Published","detail":"IMDA’s Model AI Governance Framework second edition remains voluntary.","sourceUrl":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Singapore Model AI Governance Framework","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"Singapore","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Infocomm Media Development Authority","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and updates the voluntary Model AI Governance Framework."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-imda-voluntary"]}],"sources":[],"evidence":[],"positions":[],"timeline":[]}],"asks":[{"id":"ask-machine-readable","slug":"machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","text":"Require machine-readable marking of AI-generated or altered content","summary":"Require covered providers to attach detectable technical provenance markers to synthetic or materially altered content.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"In force","detail":"Article 50 marking duties apply from 2 August 2026, subject to a limited legacy-system grace period.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"In force","detail":"The AI-generated synthetic content labelling measures apply from 1 September 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"AI Act · Article 50","type":"Regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Applicable","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"name":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"China","status":"In force","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Implements machine-readable marking through Article 50."},{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Requires covered providers to apply explicit and implicit labels."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-machine","ev-cn-date","ev-convergence"],"questionSlug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","question":"Should AI-generated content be labelled?","jurisdictions":["EU","China","United States"]},{"id":"ask-visible-label","slug":"visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","text":"Require visible disclosure for deepfakes and public-interest synthetic media","summary":"Require people encountering covered synthetic media to receive a clear, visible disclosure rather than relying only on hidden metadata.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"In force","detail":"Article 50 disclosure duties apply to deepfakes and specified public-interest text.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"In force","detail":"Covered synthetic content is subject to labelling measures in force since September 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"AI Act · Article 50","type":"Regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Applicable","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act"},{"name":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"China","status":"In force","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Requires disclosure for covered deepfakes and synthetic public-interest content."},{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Requires labelling by covered synthetic-content service providers."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-cn-date","ev-korea-labelling"],"questionSlug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","question":"Should AI-generated content be labelled?","jurisdictions":["EU","China","United States"]},{"id":"ask-korea-transparency","slug":"korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties","text":"Require advance notice and clear labelling for generative and high-impact AI","summary":"Require AI business operators providing high-impact or generative AI to inform users in advance and clearly label generative outputs, including deepfakes.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"South Korea","state":"In force","detail":"MSIT states the AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree took effect on 22 January 2026, with at least a one-year grace period for most penalties.","sourceUrl":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Korea AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"South Korea","status":"In force","url":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Ministry of Science and ICT (Korea)","stance":"support","summary":"Implements transparency and labelling duties under the AI Basic Act package."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-korea-effective","ev-korea-labelling"],"questionSlug":"should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","question":"Should AI-generated content be labelled?","jurisdictions":["EU","China","United States"]},{"id":"ask-foundation-disclosure","slug":"foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules","text":"Require public disclosure rules for foundation-model training data, testing and operations","summary":"Direct a federal regulator to establish public-information requirements covering training data, documentation, testing, inference-time collection and model operations for covered foundation models.","status":"introduced","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Introduced","detail":"H.R. 8094 was introduced on 26 March 2026 and directs the FTC to establish foundation-model disclosure requirements.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr8094/BILLS-119hr8094ih.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"H.R. 8094 · AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026","type":"Bill","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Introduced","url":"https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr8094/BILLS-119hr8094ih.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Rep. Don Beyer","stance":"support","summary":"Sponsored the House bill directing FTC foundation-model disclosure rules."},{"actor":"United States Congress","stance":"unclear","summary":"The bill remains at the introduced stage pending committee action."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr8094-transparency"],"questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-agent-lifecycle","slug":"lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents","text":"Require lifecycle safety governance for autonomous AI agents","summary":"Treat safety, reliability and trustworthiness as requirements across research, deployment and promotion of AI agents with autonomous capabilities.","status":"proposed","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"China","state":"Policy guidance issued","detail":"CAC, NDRC and MIIT jointly issued implementation opinions on AI-agent development and lifecycle governance on 8 May 2026.","sourceUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Implementation Opinions on Standardized Application and Innovative Development of AI Agents","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"China","status":"Issued","url":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Cyberspace Administration of China","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer of the national AI-agent implementation opinions."},{"actor":"National Development and Reform Commission","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer linking agent development to national planning priorities."},{"actor":"Ministry of Industry and Information Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Joint issuer of the agent standards and industry-development guidance."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-cac-agents","ev-cac-agents-definition","ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","ev-cac-agents-graded-governance"],"questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-frontier-frameworks","slug":"frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks","text":"Require large frontier developers to publish catastrophic-risk safety frameworks","summary":"Require covered large frontier developers to write, implement, comply with and publish a frontier AI framework covering catastrophic-risk assessment, mitigations and related disclosures.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"California","state":"In force","detail":"California Business and Professions Code Chapter 25.1 took effect on 1 January 2026.","sourceUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title="}],"vehicles":[{"name":"California SB 53 · Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"California","status":"In force","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title="}],"positions":[{"actor":"California Legislature","stance":"support","summary":"Enacted SB 53 as Chapter 138, Statutes of 2025."},{"actor":"Sen. Scott Wiener","stance":"support","summary":"Authored the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-framework","ev-sb53-effective"],"questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-nist-rmf","slug":"voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks","text":"Use voluntary AI risk-management frameworks for organisational governance","summary":"Adopt voluntary frameworks such as the NIST AI RMF to manage trustworthiness risks without treating the framework text as a statute.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published","detail":"NIST released AI RMF 1.0 on 26 January 2023 for voluntary use.","sourceUrl":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"NIST AI Risk Management Framework","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework"}],"positions":[{"actor":"National Institute of Standards and Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and maintains the voluntary AI RMF and related profiles."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-nist-voluntary"],"questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-gpai-code","slug":"gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path","text":"Offer a voluntary code of practice for general-purpose AI Act compliance","summary":"Provide a multi-stakeholder code that GPAI providers may use to demonstrate compliance with AI Act transparency, copyright and systemic-risk duties.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Published","detail":"The Commission received the final GPAI Code of Practice on 10 July 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"EU","status":"Published","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available"}],"positions":[{"actor":"European Commission AI Office","stance":"support","summary":"Received and later assessed the Code as an adequate voluntary compliance tool."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-gpai-code"],"questionSlug":"should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","question":"Should frontier models face mandatory evaluations?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-datacenter-moratorium","slug":"moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres","text":"Pause new large AI data centres pending resource and security review","summary":"Pause construction or upgrading of covered AI data centres until Congress enacts specified safeguards and expressly terminates the moratorium.","status":"introduced","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Introduced","detail":"H.R. 9442 was introduced on 24 June 2026 and referred to two House committees.","sourceUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"H.R. 9442 · Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act","type":"Bill","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Introduced","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez","stance":"support","summary":"Introduced the House bill establishing the proposed moratorium."},{"actor":"United States Congress","stance":"unclear","summary":"The bill remains at the introduced stage pending committee action."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr9442-moratorium","ev-hr9442-reporting","ev-iea-demand-2025"],"questionSlug":"should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls","question":"Should AI data centres face growth controls?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-electricity-projections","slug":"publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections","text":"Publish authoritative AI data-centre electricity demand projections","summary":"Maintain public, method-stated projections of data-centre and AI-focused electricity demand for grid and infrastructure planning.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published (IEA analysis)","detail":"The IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI executive summary updates 2025 growth and 2030 projections. IEA is an intergovernmental agency; the report is not UN law.","sourceUrl":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI","type":"Official analysis","status":"Published","url":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary"}],"positions":[{"actor":"International Energy Agency","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes recurring measurement of data-centre and AI electricity demand."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-iea-demand-2025","ev-iea-2030-projection"],"questionSlug":"should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls","question":"Should AI data centres face growth controls?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","United Kingdom","China"]},{"id":"ask-oecd-definition","slug":"adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles","text":"Adopt the OECD AI-system definition and trustworthy-AI principles","summary":"Use the OECD Recommendation’s AI-system definition and principles as a shared baseline for domestic policy and legislative drafting.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"EU instruments often reuse OECD vocabulary. The Recommendation itself is OECD soft law, not EU legislation.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"},{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"US frameworks frequently cite OECD definitions without making them binding federal statute.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"},{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"Referenced in drafting","detail":"Japan’s promotion and guidelines approach cites international norms, including OECD-style principles.","sourceUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence","type":"Recommendation","status":"In force (soft law)","url":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en"}],"positions":[{"actor":"OECD Council","stance":"support","summary":"Adopted the Recommendation in 2019 and revised it in May 2024."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-oecd-definition","ev-oecd-revision-date"],"questionSlug":"should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules","question":"Should intergovernmental AI principles guide national rules?","jurisdictions":["EU","United States","United Kingdom","Japan"]},{"id":"ask-unesco-implement","slug":"implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","text":"Implement UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","summary":"Translate the UNESCO ethics recommendation’s values, principles and policy action areas into national law, guidance or institutional practice.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Implementation contested","detail":"193 UNESCO Member States adopted the recommendation in November 2021. Domestic implementation remains the open question for EU members and others.","sourceUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"},{"jurisdiction":"Brazil","state":"Implementation contested","detail":"National follow-up, not UNESCO membership alone, determines whether recommendation principles become domestic duties.","sourceUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","type":"Recommendation","status":"Adopted","url":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics"}],"positions":[{"actor":"UNESCO Member States","stance":"support","summary":"Adopted the recommendation as the first global UNESCO AI ethics standard."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-unesco-adoption"],"questionSlug":"should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation","question":"Should states implement UNESCO’s AI ethics recommendation?","jurisdictions":["EU","United States","United Kingdom","Brazil"]},{"id":"ask-coe-ratify","slug":"ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai","text":"Sign and ratify the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence","summary":"Express consent to be bound by CETS No. 225 so the Convention’s human-rights, democracy and rule-of-law duties apply to the Party.","status":"proposed","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"EU","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"Opened for signature on 5 September 2024. Entry into force needs five parties including three Council of Europe member States. EU and member-state ratification tracks are separate from the treaty text itself.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"},{"jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"UK signature and ratification status must be checked against the Treaty Office, not assumed from openness of the instrument.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"},{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"Open for Parties","detail":"Non-member States of the Council of Europe may also become Parties under the Convention’s accession rules.","sourceUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"CoE Framework Convention on AI (CETS No. 225)","type":"Treaty","status":"Opened for signature","url":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Council of Europe Committee on Artificial Intelligence","stance":"support","summary":"Drafted and advanced the Framework Convention text."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-coe-aim","ev-coe-eif"],"questionSlug":"should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties","question":"Should states join binding AI human-rights treaties?","jurisdictions":["EU","United Kingdom","United States","Japan"]},{"id":"ask-ear-controls","slug":"control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear","text":"Control advanced computing integrated circuits under export administration rules","summary":"Use Export Administration Regulations revisions to licence or restrict advanced computing ICs used in AI datacentre deployments.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"In force","detail":"BIS interim final rule FR 2025-00711 took effect on 16 January 2025.","sourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"BIS advanced computing IC interim final rule","type":"Administrative measure","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"In force","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Bureau of Industry and Security","stance":"support","summary":"Issued the January 2025 EAR revisions on advanced computing ICs."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-bis-ear"],"questionSlug":"should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls","question":"Should advanced AI chips face export controls?","jurisdictions":["United States","China","EU","Japan","South Korea"]},{"id":"ask-japan-promotion","slug":"enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes","text":"Enact AI promotion statutes that direct national guidelines","summary":"Pass promotion-focused AI legislation that treats AI as foundational technology and requires government guidelines aligned with international norms.","status":"in-force","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"Japan","state":"In force","detail":"Act No. 53 of 2025 is published on Japanese Law Translation.","sourceUrl":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Japan AI Promotion Act","type":"Statute","jurisdiction":"Japan","status":"In force","url":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Cabinet Office of Japan","stance":"support","summary":"Coordinates promotion policy around the 2025 AI statute."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-japan-purpose","ev-japan-guidelines"],"questionSlug":"should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans","question":"Should states prefer AI promotion statutes to horizontal bans?","jurisdictions":["Japan","South Korea","United Kingdom","United States","EU"]},{"id":"ask-c2pa","slug":"adopt-open-content-provenance-standards","text":"Adopt open content-provenance standards such as C2PA Content Credentials","summary":"Use open technical specifications for content provenance and authenticity assertions in synthetic-media governance.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United States","state":"Published (voluntary)","detail":"C2PA Specification 2.3 defines the Content Credentials technical standard.","sourceUrl":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"C2PA Content Credentials specification","type":"Standard","jurisdiction":"United States","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and maintains the C2PA technical specification."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-c2pa-purpose"],"questionSlug":"should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory","question":"Should watermarking standards be mandatory?","jurisdictions":["United States","EU","China","South Korea"]},{"id":"ask-uk-regulators","slug":"implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators","text":"Implement AI principles through existing regulators on a non-statutory basis first","summary":"Issue cross-cutting AI principles without immediate statute and assign implementation to existing sector regulators.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","state":"Published","detail":"The March 2023 white paper keeps principles non-statutory initially.","sourceUrl":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"UK AI regulation white paper","type":"Policy paper","jurisdiction":"United Kingdom","status":"Published","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper"}],"positions":[{"actor":"UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","stance":"support","summary":"Published the pro-innovation white paper assigning principles to existing regulators."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-uk-principles"],"questionSlug":"should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules","question":"Should sector regulators own AI rules instead of a horizontal act?","jurisdictions":["United Kingdom","Singapore","United States","EU","Canada"]},{"id":"ask-singapore-framework","slug":"publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks","text":"Publish voluntary national AI governance frameworks for organisations","summary":"Issue ready-to-use voluntary frameworks covering explainability, transparency, fairness and human-centric AI use.","status":"adopted","jurisdictionStates":[{"jurisdiction":"Singapore","state":"Published","detail":"IMDA’s Model AI Governance Framework second edition remains voluntary.","sourceUrl":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf"}],"vehicles":[{"name":"Singapore Model AI Governance Framework","type":"Guidance","jurisdiction":"Singapore","status":"Published (voluntary)","url":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf"}],"positions":[{"actor":"Infocomm Media Development Authority","stance":"support","summary":"Publishes and updates the voluntary Model AI Governance Framework."}],"evidenceIds":["ev-imda-voluntary"],"questionSlug":"should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules","question":"Should sector regulators own AI rules instead of a horizontal act?","jurisdictions":["United Kingdom","Singapore","United States","EU","Canada"]}],"actors":[{"id":"actor-eu-ai-office","slug":"european-commission-ai-office","name":"European Commission AI Office","actorType":"government","summary":"The Commission body responsible for implementing and enforcing the EU AI Act’s general-purpose AI rules and coordinating the wider regime.","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path"]},{"id":"actor-cac","slug":"cyberspace-administration-of-china","name":"Cyberspace Administration of China","actorType":"government","summary":"China’s central internet regulator and a lead authority for algorithm, synthetic-content and generative-AI governance.","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"]},{"id":"actor-ndrc","slug":"national-development-and-reform-commission","name":"National Development and Reform Commission","actorType":"government","summary":"China’s macroeconomic planning body and a joint issuer of the 2026 policy direction for AI agents.","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"]},{"id":"actor-miit","slug":"ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology","name":"Ministry of Industry and Information Technology","actorType":"government","summary":"China’s ministry for industry and information technology policy and a joint issuer of agent-governance guidance.","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"]},{"id":"actor-us-congress","slug":"united-states-congress","name":"United States Congress","actorType":"legislature","summary":"The federal legislature in which current proposals address foundation-model transparency, evaluation standards and AI data-centre development.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules","moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"]},{"id":"actor-don-beyer","slug":"don-beyer","name":"Rep. Don Beyer","actorType":"legislator","summary":"United States representative and sponsor of the AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules"]},{"id":"actor-ftc","slug":"federal-trade-commission","name":"Federal Trade Commission","actorType":"government","summary":"The FTC is the United States consumer-protection and competition agency named as the rulemaking body in H.R. 8094’s foundation-model disclosure proposal.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules"]},{"id":"actor-aoc","slug":"alexandria-ocasio-cortez","name":"Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez","actorType":"legislator","summary":"United States representative and sponsor of the House AI Data Center Moratorium Act.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"]},{"id":"actor-nist","slug":"national-institute-of-standards-and-technology","name":"National Institute of Standards and Technology","actorType":"standards-body","summary":"The federal standards body that develops AI risk-management, measurement and evaluation resources.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules","voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks"]},{"id":"actor-uk-dsit","slug":"uk-department-for-science-innovation-and-technology","name":"UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","actorType":"government","summary":"The UK department responsible for national AI policy, regulatory coordination and government-backed AI evaluation capacity.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations","should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators"]},{"id":"actor-ca-legislature","slug":"california-legislature","name":"California Legislature","actorType":"legislature","summary":"State legislature that enacted the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 53).","jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"]},{"id":"actor-scott-wiener","slug":"scott-wiener","name":"Sen. Scott Wiener","actorType":"legislator","summary":"California senator and author of SB 53, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act.","jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"]},{"id":"actor-ca-oes","slug":"california-office-of-emergency-services","name":"California Office of Emergency Services","actorType":"government","summary":"California agency designated to receive frontier catastrophic-risk summaries and critical safety incident reports under SB 53.","jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"]},{"id":"actor-oecd-council","slug":"oecd-council","name":"OECD Council","actorType":"international-organisation","summary":"OECD decision-making body that adopted and later revised the Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence.","jurisdictionSlugs":[],"questionSlugs":["should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules"],"askSlugs":["adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles"]},{"id":"actor-unesco-members","slug":"unesco-member-states","name":"UNESCO Member States","actorType":"international-organisation","summary":"The 193 UNESCO Member States that adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in November 2021.","jurisdictionSlugs":[],"questionSlugs":["should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"askSlugs":["implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"]},{"id":"actor-iea","slug":"international-energy-agency","name":"International Energy Agency","actorType":"international-organisation","summary":"Intergovernmental energy agency measuring data-centre and AI electricity demand for policymakers.","jurisdictionSlugs":[],"questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections"]},{"id":"actor-coe-cai","slug":"council-of-europe-committee-on-ai","name":"Council of Europe Committee on Artificial Intelligence","actorType":"international-organisation","summary":"Council of Europe body that drafted the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (CETS No. 225).","jurisdictionSlugs":[],"questionSlugs":["should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties"],"askSlugs":["ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai"]},{"id":"actor-bis","slug":"bureau-of-industry-and-security","name":"Bureau of Industry and Security","actorType":"government","summary":"US Commerce bureau administering Export Administration Regulations for advanced computing and AI-relevant chips.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls"],"askSlugs":["control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear"]},{"id":"actor-japan-cabinet","slug":"japan-cabinet-office","name":"Cabinet Office of Japan","actorType":"government","summary":"Japanese executive office coordinating science, technology and AI promotion policy around Act No. 53 of 2025.","jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"],"questionSlugs":["should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans"],"askSlugs":["enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes"]},{"id":"actor-c2pa","slug":"coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity","name":"Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity","actorType":"standards-body","summary":"Multi-stakeholder coalition publishing the C2PA technical specification for Content Credentials.","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"questionSlugs":["should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory"],"askSlugs":["adopt-open-content-provenance-standards"]},{"id":"actor-msit","slug":"korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict","name":"Ministry of Science and ICT (Korea)","actorType":"government","summary":"Lead Korean ministry implementing the AI Basic Act, Enforcement Decree and related guidance.","jurisdictionSlugs":["south-korea"],"questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties"]},{"id":"actor-imda","slug":"singapore-imda","name":"Infocomm Media Development Authority","actorType":"government","summary":"Singapore authority publishing the Model AI Governance Framework and related voluntary tools.","jurisdictionSlugs":["singapore"],"questionSlugs":["should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks"]}],"jurisdictions":[{"id":"jur-eu","slug":"european-union","name":"EU","shortName":"EU","summary":"The EU regulates AI through directly applicable legislation, coordinated enforcement and sector-specific law.","approach":"The AI Act uses risk categories and provider or deployer duties. The European Commission AI Office oversees general-purpose AI while national authorities enforce much of the wider regime.","institutions":["European Commission AI Office","National market-surveillance authorities"]},{"id":"jur-us","slug":"united-states","name":"United States","shortName":"US","summary":"United States AI policy combines federal executive action, agency standards, congressional proposals and state law.","approach":"No single horizontal federal AI statute governs the entire field. Congress, federal agencies and states advance overlapping rules on disclosure, evaluation, infrastructure and sectoral use.","institutions":["United States Congress","Federal Trade Commission","NIST"]},{"id":"jur-uk","slug":"united-kingdom","name":"United Kingdom","shortName":"UK","summary":"The United Kingdom relies on existing regulators, central coordination and targeted legislation rather than one general AI act.","approach":"Cross-sector principles guide regulators while government institutions develop evaluation capacity and targeted rules for specific risks and applications.","institutions":["Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","AI Security Institute"]},{"id":"jur-china","slug":"china","name":"China","shortName":"China","summary":"China governs AI through national laws, administrative measures, technical standards and service-specific rules.","approach":"The framework combines development policy with provider duties covering algorithms, generated content, security, registration and information services.","institutions":["Cyberspace Administration of China","NDRC","MIIT"]},{"id":"jur-california","slug":"california","name":"California","shortName":"CA","summary":"California regulates frontier AI developers through state statute alongside federal and local rules.","approach":"State legislation such as the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act sets publication, incident-reporting and civil-penalty duties for covered frontier developers.","institutions":["California Legislature","Office of Emergency Services","Attorney General"]},{"id":"jur-canada","slug":"canada","name":"Canada","shortName":"Canada","summary":"Canada governs AI through privacy law, sectoral rules and voluntary codes rather than a single federal AI statute currently in force.","approach":"Federal privacy statutes, provincial regimes such as Quebec Law 25, and sector supervisors supply most binding duties while national AI strategy work continues.","institutions":["ISED","Office of the Privacy Commissioner","Provincial privacy regulators"]},{"id":"jur-japan","slug":"japan","name":"Japan","shortName":"Japan","summary":"Japan coordinates AI policy through soft-law guidelines, promotion legislation and ministry-led standards work.","approach":"Promotion and coordination instruments sit alongside sector regulators and voluntary business guidelines rather than one horizontal prohibition statute.","institutions":["METI","Cabinet Office","AI Strategy Headquarters"]},{"id":"jur-korea","slug":"south-korea","name":"South Korea","shortName":"Korea","summary":"South Korea combines industrial promotion with statutory duties for high-impact and generative AI under the AI Basic Act.","approach":"MSIT leads implementation of transparency, safety and high-impact obligations, with grace periods and guidance clarifying early enforcement.","institutions":["MSIT","PIPC","National AI Strategy Committee"]},{"id":"jur-singapore","slug":"singapore","name":"Singapore","shortName":"Singapore","summary":"Singapore relies on voluntary model frameworks, testing toolkits and sector guidance for AI governance.","approach":"IMDA’s Model AI Governance Framework and related tools aim for interoperability with international risk frameworks without a single omnibus AI act.","institutions":["IMDA","PDPC","AI Verify Foundation"]},{"id":"jur-australia","slug":"australia","name":"Australia","shortName":"Australia","summary":"Australia develops AI policy through federal consultation, voluntary standards and existing consumer and privacy law.","approach":"National AI policy work sits with existing regulators while mandatory guardrail proposals remain under political and legislative debate.","institutions":["Department of Industry, Science and Resources","OAIC","eSafety Commissioner"]},{"id":"jur-india","slug":"india","name":"India","shortName":"India","summary":"India addresses AI through MeitY advisories, digital public infrastructure policy and sectoral regulation.","approach":"Guidance and platform-facing advisories have been the main federal tools while broader digital legislation continues to evolve.","institutions":["MeitY","NITI Aayog","Sector regulators"]},{"id":"jur-brazil","slug":"brazil","name":"Brazil","shortName":"Brazil","summary":"Brazil debates comprehensive AI legislation while applying existing consumer, data-protection and sectoral rules.","approach":"National Congress has advanced AI bills while LGPD and sector supervisors remain the operative compliance baseline.","institutions":["National Congress","ANPD","Executive branch ministries"]}],"vehicles":[{"id":"vehicle-eu-article50","slug":"eu-ai-act-article-50","title":"EU AI Act · Article 50 transparency obligations","shortTitle":"AI Act · Article 50","vehicleType":"regulation","status":"Applicable","summary":"Article 50 establishes transparency duties for specified AI interactions and synthetic or manipulated content.","explainer":"The provision separates provider duties, including machine-readable marking, from deployer duties such as disclosure of deepfakes and certain public-interest text.","jurisdictionSlug":"european-union","documentIds":["doc-eu-art50-faq","doc-eu-enforcement"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"eventSlugs":["eu-article-50-enforcement-begins","eu-article-50-legacy-grace-period-ends"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-eu-machine","ev-convergence"],"resolvedAt":"2026-08-02"},{"id":"vehicle-cn-labels","slug":"china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures","title":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","shortTitle":"Synthetic-content labelling measures","vehicleType":"administrative-measure","status":"In force","summary":"China’s administrative measures govern explicit and implicit labels for covered AI-generated synthetic content.","explainer":"The measures allocate duties across service providers and distribution channels and connect labelling to existing algorithm and deep-synthesis rules.","jurisdictionSlug":"china","documentIds":["doc-cac-labels"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china"],"eventSlugs":["china-labelling-measures-published","china-labelling-measures-effective"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cn-date","ev-convergence"],"introducedAt":"2025-03-14","resolvedAt":"2025-09-01"},{"id":"vehicle-hr8094","slug":"hr-8094-ai-foundation-model-transparency-act","title":"H.R. 8094 · AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026","shortTitle":"H.R. 8094","vehicleType":"bill","status":"Introduced","summary":"A House bill directing the FTC to establish public disclosure requirements for covered foundation models.","explainer":"The vehicle addresses training data, documentation, testing, risks and model operations. It is a disclosure proposal, not a government predeployment approval regime.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-states","documentIds":["doc-hr8094"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","don-beyer","federal-trade-commission","national-institute-of-standards-and-technology"],"eventSlugs":["hr-8094-introduced"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr8094-transparency"],"introducedAt":"2026-03-26"},{"id":"vehicle-cn-agents","slug":"china-ai-agent-development-guidance","title":"Implementation Opinions on Standardized Application and Innovative Development of AI Agents","shortTitle":"AI-agent implementation opinions","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Issued","summary":"Joint policy guidance defining AI agents, setting four principles, and organising work on technology foundations, classified safety governance, nineteen application scenes and an innovation ecology.","explainer":"The opinions define agents through autonomous perception, memory, decision, interaction and execution, keep user final-decision rights, and preview filing/testing/recall measures for sensitive sectors.","jurisdictionSlug":"china","documentIds":["doc-cac-agent-guidance"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"eventSlugs":["china-agent-guidance-issued"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cac-agents","ev-cac-agents-definition","ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","ev-cac-agents-graded-governance"],"resolvedAt":"2026-05-08"},{"id":"vehicle-hr9442","slug":"hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act","title":"H.R. 9442 · Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act","shortTitle":"H.R. 9442","vehicleType":"bill","status":"Introduced","summary":"A House bill proposing a conditional moratorium on construction or upgrading of covered AI data centres.","explainer":"The pause would remain until Congress enacted a list of safeguards and expressly terminated it. The bill also proposes quarterly public reporting on facility impacts.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-states","documentIds":["doc-hr9442"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","alexandria-ocasio-cortez"],"eventSlugs":["hr-9442-introduced"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr9442-moratorium","ev-hr9442-reporting"],"introducedAt":"2026-06-24"},{"id":"vehicle-ca-sb53","slug":"california-sb-53-tfiaa","title":"California SB 53 · Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act","shortTitle":"California SB 53 / TFAIA","vehicleType":"regulation","status":"In force","summary":"Chaptered California statute requiring large frontier developers to publish frontier AI frameworks, transparency reports and critical-incident pathways.","explainer":"The Act is state law effective 1 January 2026. It pairs public frameworks with Office of Emergency Services reporting and Attorney General civil penalties.","jurisdictionSlug":"california","documentIds":["doc-ca-sb53-code"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature","scott-wiener","california-office-of-emergency-services"],"eventSlugs":["california-sb53-chaptered","california-sb53-effective"],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-framework","ev-sb53-effective"],"introducedAt":"2025-01-07","resolvedAt":"2026-01-01"},{"id":"vehicle-oecd-ai","slug":"oecd-recommendation-on-ai","title":"OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence","shortTitle":"OECD AI Recommendation","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"In force (soft law)","summary":"Intergovernmental recommendation setting trustworthy-AI principles and a shared AI-system definition for adherents.","explainer":"Adopted in 2019 and revised on 3 May 2024. It is soft law implemented through domestic policy rather than a self-executing treaty.","documentIds":["doc-oecd-recommendation"],"askSlugs":["adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles"],"actorSlugs":["oecd-council"],"eventSlugs":["oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-2024"],"evidenceIds":["ev-oecd-definition","ev-oecd-revision-date"],"resolvedAt":"2024-05-03"},{"id":"vehicle-nist-rmf","slug":"nist-ai-risk-management-framework","title":"NIST AI Risk Management Framework","shortTitle":"NIST AI RMF","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published (voluntary)","summary":"US federal voluntary framework for managing AI trustworthiness risks across design, development, use and evaluation.","explainer":"Released 26 January 2023, with later generative-AI and critical-infrastructure profile work. The framework text itself remains voluntary.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-states","documentIds":["doc-nist-ai-rmf"],"askSlugs":["voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["national-institute-of-standards-and-technology"],"eventSlugs":["nist-ai-rmf-released"],"evidenceIds":["ev-nist-voluntary"],"resolvedAt":"2023-01-26"},{"id":"vehicle-unesco-ethics","slug":"unesco-recommendation-ethics-of-ai","title":"UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","shortTitle":"UNESCO AI ethics recommendation","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Adopted","summary":"Global soft-law standard on AI ethics adopted by UNESCO Member States in November 2021.","explainer":"The recommendation pairs core values and principles with policy action areas. National implementation remains the binding step.","documentIds":["doc-unesco-ethics"],"askSlugs":["implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"actorSlugs":["unesco-member-states"],"eventSlugs":["unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation-adopted"],"evidenceIds":["ev-unesco-adoption"],"resolvedAt":"2021-11-01"},{"id":"vehicle-eu-gpai-code","slug":"eu-gpai-code-of-practice","title":"EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice","shortTitle":"GPAI Code of Practice","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published","summary":"Voluntary multi-stakeholder code detailing AI Act duties for providers of general-purpose AI models.","explainer":"Published 10 July 2025 with chapters on transparency, copyright and safety/security. It supports demonstration of AI Act GPAI compliance.","jurisdictionSlug":"european-union","documentIds":["doc-eu-gpai-code"],"askSlugs":["gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"eventSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-published"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-gpai-code"],"resolvedAt":"2025-07-10"},{"id":"vehicle-iea-energy-ai","slug":"iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai","title":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI","shortTitle":"IEA Energy and AI update","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published","summary":"IEA analytical report updating data-centre electricity demand growth for 2025 and projections to 2030.","explainer":"Not a legal instrument. Policymakers use the projections as evidence in grid, permitting and AI-infrastructure debates.","documentIds":["doc-iea-energy-ai-exec"],"askSlugs":["publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections"],"actorSlugs":["international-energy-agency"],"eventSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-ai-published"],"evidenceIds":["ev-iea-demand-2025","ev-iea-2030-projection"],"resolvedAt":"2026-06-01"},{"id":"vehicle-coe-cets-225","slug":"coe-framework-convention-ai","title":"Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (CETS No. 225)","shortTitle":"CoE AI Framework Convention","vehicleType":"regulation","status":"Opened for signature","summary":"First binding multilateral AI treaty focused on human rights, democracy and the rule of law.","explainer":"Opened for signature on 5 September 2024. Entry into force requires five parties including three CoE members.","documentIds":["doc-coe-cets-225"],"askSlugs":["ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai"],"actorSlugs":["council-of-europe-committee-on-ai"],"eventSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-opened"],"evidenceIds":["ev-coe-aim","ev-coe-eif"],"introducedAt":"2024-09-05"},{"id":"vehicle-bis-ifr","slug":"bis-advanced-computing-ifr-jan-2025","title":"BIS advanced computing IC interim final rule (Jan 2025)","shortTitle":"BIS advanced computing IFR","vehicleType":"administrative-measure","status":"In force","summary":"US EAR revision controlling advanced computing integrated circuits relevant to AI datacentre chips.","explainer":"Effective 16 January 2025 under ECCN 3A090-related revisions published as FR 2025-00711.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-states","documentIds":["doc-bis-ifr-2025-01-16"],"askSlugs":["control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear"],"actorSlugs":["bureau-of-industry-and-security"],"eventSlugs":["bis-advanced-computing-ifr-effective"],"evidenceIds":["ev-bis-ear"],"resolvedAt":"2025-01-16"},{"id":"vehicle-japan-promotion","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act","title":"Japan AI Promotion Act (Act No. 53 of 2025)","shortTitle":"Japan AI Promotion Act","vehicleType":"regulation","status":"In force","summary":"Japanese statute promoting AI research, development and utilization and directing national guidelines.","explainer":"Promotion-oriented statute rather than a horizontal prohibitions code. Guidelines follow international norms under Article 13.","jurisdictionSlug":"japan","documentIds":["doc-japan-ai-promotion"],"askSlugs":["enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes"],"actorSlugs":["japan-cabinet-office"],"eventSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act-enacted"],"evidenceIds":["ev-japan-purpose","ev-japan-guidelines"],"introducedAt":"2025-06-04","resolvedAt":"2025-09-01"},{"id":"vehicle-c2pa","slug":"c2pa-content-credentials-spec","title":"C2PA Content Credentials technical specification","shortTitle":"C2PA / Content Credentials","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published (voluntary)","summary":"Open technical standard for attaching and validating content provenance assertions.","explainer":"Industry standard often cited in labelling debates. Legal mandates are separate policy choices.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-states","documentIds":["doc-c2pa-spec"],"askSlugs":["adopt-open-content-provenance-standards"],"actorSlugs":["coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity"],"eventSlugs":["c2pa-spec-2-3-published"],"evidenceIds":["ev-c2pa-purpose"]},{"id":"vehicle-uk-white-paper","slug":"uk-ai-regulation-white-paper","title":"UK AI regulation white paper (pro-innovation approach)","shortTitle":"UK AI white paper","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published","summary":"UK policy paper proposing five AI principles implemented by existing regulators on a non-statutory basis initially.","explainer":"Institutional design document, not a statute. Later instruments may harden parts of the approach.","jurisdictionSlug":"united-kingdom","documentIds":["doc-uk-ai-white-paper"],"askSlugs":["implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators"],"actorSlugs":["uk-department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"],"eventSlugs":["uk-ai-white-paper-published"],"evidenceIds":["ev-uk-principles"],"resolvedAt":"2023-03-29"},{"id":"vehicle-korea-basic","slug":"korea-ai-basic-act","title":"Korea AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree","shortTitle":"Korea AI Basic Act","vehicleType":"regulation","status":"In force","summary":"South Korea’s comprehensive AI statute combining industry promotion with transparency, safety and high-impact duties.","explainer":"In force from 22 January 2026 with at least a one-year grace period for most investigations and penalties.","jurisdictionSlug":"south-korea","documentIds":["doc-msit-ai-basic-act"],"askSlugs":["korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict"],"eventSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act-effective"],"evidenceIds":["ev-korea-effective","ev-korea-labelling"],"resolvedAt":"2026-01-22"},{"id":"vehicle-imda-framework","slug":"singapore-model-ai-governance-framework","title":"Singapore Model AI Governance Framework","shortTitle":"Singapore Model Framework","vehicleType":"guidance","status":"Published (voluntary)","summary":"Voluntary national framework for organisational AI governance published by IMDA/PDPC.","explainer":"Second edition positions the framework as a ready-to-use voluntary tool emphasising explainability, transparency, fairness and human-centric use.","jurisdictionSlug":"singapore","documentIds":["doc-imda-model-framework"],"askSlugs":["publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["singapore-imda"],"eventSlugs":["singapore-model-framework-2nd-ed"],"evidenceIds":["ev-imda-voluntary"],"resolvedAt":"2020-01-21"}],"events":[{"id":"event-cn-labels-published","slug":"china-labelling-measures-published","title":"China publishes synthetic-content labelling measures","eventType":"publication","date":"2025-03-14","summary":"Four authorities published measures governing labels for AI-generated synthetic content.","explainer":"Publication established the final policy text and a future effective date, giving covered providers time to prepare.","significance":"Created a national labelling regime for covered synthetic media.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cn-date"],"intelligenceSlugs":[]},{"id":"event-cn-labels-effective","slug":"china-labelling-measures-effective","title":"China’s synthetic-content labelling measures take effect","eventType":"effective-date","date":"2025-09-01","summary":"The national labelling measures entered into force.","explainer":"The effective date moved the record from adopted text to an operative provider and platform regime.","significance":"Converted the labelling policy into an enforceable administrative measure.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cn-date"],"intelligenceSlugs":[]},{"id":"event-eu-art50-enforcement","slug":"eu-article-50-enforcement-begins","title":"EU Article 50 transparency duties enter application","eventType":"enforcement","date":"2026-08-02","summary":"The EU’s Article 50 transparency duties became applicable as enforcement powers expanded.","explainer":"The development moved disclosure and technical-marking duties from implementation planning into the operative phase.","significance":"Changed the immediate compliance position for covered providers and deployers.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-ai-act-article-50"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies","ev-eu-machine"],"intelligenceSlugs":["eu-ai-act-enters-enforcement-phase"]},{"id":"event-eu-legacy-deadline","slug":"eu-article-50-legacy-grace-period-ends","title":"Limited Article 50 legacy-system grace period ends","eventType":"deadline","date":"2026-12-02","summary":"The limited transition for machine-readable marking by certain systems placed on the market before August closes.","explainer":"The deadline does not defer all Article 50 obligations. It applies narrowly to specified marking and detection duties for pre-existing systems.","significance":"Closes the remaining transition identified in the Commission’s Article 50 guidance.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-ai-act-article-50"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-applies"],"intelligenceSlugs":["eu-ai-act-enters-enforcement-phase"]},{"id":"event-hr8094-introduced","slug":"hr-8094-introduced","title":"AI Foundation Model Transparency Act introduced in the House","eventType":"introduction","date":"2026-03-26","summary":"H.R. 8094 entered the 119th Congress and was referred for committee consideration.","explainer":"The introduction created a federal vehicle for foundation-model disclosure covering training data, testing and operations.","significance":"Placed a concrete model-transparency proposal before Congress.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","don-beyer","federal-trade-commission"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-8094-ai-foundation-model-transparency-act"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr8094-transparency"],"intelligenceSlugs":["us-foundation-model-transparency-bill"]},{"id":"event-cn-agent-guidance","slug":"china-agent-guidance-issued","title":"China issues national policy direction for AI agents","eventType":"publication","date":"2026-05-08","summary":"CAC, NDRC and MIIT jointly issued implementation opinions for AI agents.","explainer":"The guidance combines development priorities with lifecycle safety, standards, monitoring and governance.","significance":"Created a dedicated national policy record for autonomous AI-agent systems.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"evidenceIds":["ev-cac-agents","ev-cac-agents-definition","ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","ev-cac-agents-graded-governance"],"intelligenceSlugs":["china-agent-governance-guidance"]},{"id":"event-hr9442-introduced","slug":"hr-9442-introduced","title":"AI Data Center Moratorium Act introduced in the House","eventType":"introduction","date":"2026-06-24","summary":"H.R. 9442 was introduced and referred to House committees.","explainer":"The proposal joined a construction pause to federal safeguards and a public reporting programme for facility impacts.","significance":"Brought a direct federal AI-infrastructure growth-control ask into Congress.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","alexandria-ocasio-cortez"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act"],"evidenceIds":["ev-hr9442-moratorium","ev-hr9442-reporting"],"intelligenceSlugs":["ai-data-center-moratorium-proposal"]},{"id":"event-ca-sb53-chaptered","slug":"california-sb53-chaptered","title":"California SB 53 chaptered into law","eventType":"publication","date":"2025-09-29","summary":"SB 53 was approved by the Governor and chaptered as Chapter 138, Statutes of 2025.","explainer":"Chaptering fixed the statutory text that later took effect on 1 January 2026.","significance":"Created California’s frontier-developer transparency statute.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature","scott-wiener"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["california-sb-53-tfiaa"],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-framework"],"intelligenceSlugs":["california-frontier-ai-transparency-act"]},{"id":"event-ca-sb53-effective","slug":"california-sb53-effective","title":"California frontier AI transparency duties take effect","eventType":"effective-date","date":"2026-01-01","summary":"Chapter 25.1 of the Business and Professions Code became effective.","explainer":"The effective date moved framework publication and related duties from enacted text into operative state law.","significance":"Started the operative period for large frontier developer transparency duties.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature","california-office-of-emergency-services"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["california-sb-53-tfiaa"],"evidenceIds":["ev-sb53-effective","ev-sb53-framework"],"intelligenceSlugs":["california-frontier-ai-transparency-act"]},{"id":"event-oecd-2024","slug":"oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-2024","title":"OECD revises the AI Recommendation","eventType":"publication","date":"2024-05-03","summary":"The OECD Council meeting at Ministerial level revised the Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence.","explainer":"The revision updated soft-law principles and definitions after generative-AI developments.","significance":"Refreshed the leading intergovernmental soft-law baseline for trustworthy AI.","questionSlugs":["should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules"],"askSlugs":["adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles"],"actorSlugs":["oecd-council"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["oecd-recommendation-on-ai"],"evidenceIds":["ev-oecd-revision-date","ev-oecd-definition"],"intelligenceSlugs":["oecd-ai-principles-2024-revision"]},{"id":"event-nist-rmf","slug":"nist-ai-rmf-released","title":"NIST releases AI Risk Management Framework 1.0","eventType":"publication","date":"2023-01-26","summary":"NIST published the voluntary AI Risk Management Framework.","explainer":"Release established a federal voluntary reference for organisational AI risk management.","significance":"Created the principal US federal voluntary AI risk-management baseline.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["national-institute-of-standards-and-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["nist-ai-risk-management-framework"],"evidenceIds":["ev-nist-voluntary"],"intelligenceSlugs":["nist-ai-rmf-voluntary-baseline"]},{"id":"event-unesco-ethics","slug":"unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation-adopted","title":"UNESCO adopts AI ethics recommendation","eventType":"publication","date":"2021-11-01","summary":"UNESCO Member States adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.","explainer":"Adoption created a global soft-law ethics standard with national implementation still required.","significance":"Established the first UNESCO-wide AI ethics recommendation.","questionSlugs":["should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"askSlugs":["implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"actorSlugs":["unesco-member-states"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["unesco-recommendation-ethics-of-ai"],"evidenceIds":["ev-unesco-adoption"],"intelligenceSlugs":["unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"]},{"id":"event-eu-gpai-code","slug":"eu-gpai-code-published","title":"EU GPAI Code of Practice published","eventType":"publication","date":"2025-07-10","summary":"The Commission announced receipt of the final General-Purpose AI Code of Practice.","explainer":"Publication supplied the voluntary compliance tool for AI Act GPAI provider duties ahead of enforcement milestones.","significance":"Created the principal voluntary GPAI compliance path under the AI Act.","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-of-practice"],"evidenceIds":["ev-eu-gpai-code"],"intelligenceSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-of-practice"]},{"id":"event-iea-energy-ai","slug":"iea-key-questions-energy-ai-published","title":"IEA publishes Key Questions on Energy and AI","eventType":"publication","date":"2026-06-01","summary":"The IEA released updated analysis of data-centre electricity demand growth and 2030 projections.","explainer":"The report supplies measurement for energy and AI infrastructure debates rather than a legal rule.","significance":"Updated the main intergovernmental electricity-demand baseline for AI data centres.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections"],"actorSlugs":["international-energy-agency"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai"],"evidenceIds":["ev-iea-demand-2025","ev-iea-2030-projection"],"intelligenceSlugs":["iea-data-centre-electricity-surge"]},{"id":"event-coe-opened","slug":"coe-framework-convention-opened","title":"CoE Framework Convention on AI opened for signature","eventType":"publication","date":"2024-09-05","summary":"CETS No. 225 was opened for signature in Vilnius.","explainer":"Opening for signature starts the accession path; entry into force still requires the Article 30 threshold.","significance":"Created the first binding multilateral AI human-rights treaty text.","questionSlugs":["should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties"],"askSlugs":["ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai"],"actorSlugs":["council-of-europe-committee-on-ai"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-ai"],"evidenceIds":["ev-coe-aim","ev-coe-eif"],"intelligenceSlugs":["coe-ai-framework-convention"]},{"id":"event-bis-ifr","slug":"bis-advanced-computing-ifr-effective","title":"BIS advanced computing interim final rule takes effect","eventType":"effective-date","date":"2025-01-16","summary":"The Federal Register interim final rule revising EAR advanced computing IC controls took effect.","explainer":"The date marks operative export-control changes for covered advanced computing ICs.","significance":"Hardened US compute export controls relevant to AI datacentre chips.","questionSlugs":["should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls"],"askSlugs":["control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear"],"actorSlugs":["bureau-of-industry-and-security"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["bis-advanced-computing-ifr-jan-2025"],"evidenceIds":["ev-bis-ear"],"intelligenceSlugs":["us-advanced-computing-export-controls"]},{"id":"event-japan-act","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act-enacted","title":"Japan enacts AI Promotion Act","eventType":"publication","date":"2025-06-04","summary":"Act No. 53 of 2025 on AI-related technology promotion was enacted.","explainer":"Enactment established the promotion-and-guidelines statute later brought into full enforcement.","significance":"Locked in Japan’s promotion-statute approach to national AI law.","questionSlugs":["should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans"],"askSlugs":["enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes"],"actorSlugs":["japan-cabinet-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"],"vehicleSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act"],"evidenceIds":["ev-japan-purpose","ev-japan-guidelines"],"intelligenceSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act"]},{"id":"event-c2pa","slug":"c2pa-spec-2-3-published","title":"C2PA publishes technical specification 2.3","eventType":"publication","date":"2025-01-01","summary":"C2PA Specification 2.3 defines the Content Credentials provenance standard.","explainer":"Publication updates the voluntary technical baseline used in provenance and labelling debates.","significance":"Refreshed the main open provenance standard cited by policymakers.","questionSlugs":["should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory"],"askSlugs":["adopt-open-content-provenance-standards"],"actorSlugs":["coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["c2pa-content-credentials-spec"],"evidenceIds":["ev-c2pa-purpose"],"intelligenceSlugs":["c2pa-content-credentials-standard"]},{"id":"event-uk-wp","slug":"uk-ai-white-paper-published","title":"UK publishes AI regulation white paper","eventType":"publication","date":"2023-03-29","summary":"The government presented its pro-innovation AI regulation white paper to Parliament.","explainer":"Publication set the non-statutory, regulator-led principles approach.","significance":"Documented the UK’s sector-regulator institutional design for AI.","questionSlugs":["should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators"],"actorSlugs":["uk-department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"],"vehicleSlugs":["uk-ai-regulation-white-paper"],"evidenceIds":["ev-uk-principles"],"intelligenceSlugs":["uk-regulator-led-ai-principles"]},{"id":"event-korea-basic","slug":"korea-ai-basic-act-effective","title":"Korea AI Basic Act enters into force","eventType":"effective-date","date":"2026-01-22","summary":"The AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree took effect, with a grace period of at least one year.","explainer":"The effective date started operative transparency and safety duties while deferring most penalties.","significance":"Brought Asia’s first comprehensive AI statute into force.","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties"],"actorSlugs":["korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["south-korea"],"vehicleSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act"],"evidenceIds":["ev-korea-effective","ev-korea-labelling"],"intelligenceSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act-in-force"]},{"id":"event-imda-2nd","slug":"singapore-model-framework-2nd-ed","title":"Singapore publishes Model AI Governance Framework second edition","eventType":"publication","date":"2020-01-21","summary":"IMDA published the second edition of the voluntary Model AI Governance Framework.","explainer":"The edition remains a voluntary organisational tool in Singapore’s soft-law approach.","significance":"Established Singapore’s durable voluntary governance baseline.","questionSlugs":["should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["singapore-imda"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["singapore"],"vehicleSlugs":["singapore-model-ai-governance-framework"],"evidenceIds":["ev-imda-voluntary"],"intelligenceSlugs":["singapore-model-ai-governance-framework"]}],"evidence":[{"id":"ev-eu-applies","slug":"eu-article-50-applies-from-august-2026","title":"Article 50 transparency duties entered into application","summary":"The Commission states that Article 50 applies from 2 August 2026.","explainer":"This establishes the operative date for EU duties covering disclosure of AI interaction and specified synthetic content.","whyItMatters":"It separates current legal obligations from future AI Act deadlines that were moved by later amendments.","limitations":"The date alone does not describe every duty or identify the limited transition available to certain pre-existing systems.","exactQuote":"Article 50 of the AI Act applies as from 2 August 2026.","locator":"Commission FAQ · application date","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-eu-art50-faq","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-ai-act-article-50"],"eventSlugs":["eu-article-50-enforcement-begins"]},{"id":"ev-eu-machine","slug":"eu-requires-machine-readable-marks","title":"EU rules require detectable machine-readable marks","summary":"The Commission describes a technical marking duty for covered AI-generated or altered content.","explainer":"The duty goes beyond a visible notice. Providers must make covered outputs technically detectable as generated or altered.","whyItMatters":"Technical provenance is a distinct policy instrument from user-facing deepfake labels.","limitations":"The Commission FAQ and final legal text determine scope, exceptions and the treatment of systems already on the market.","exactQuote":"AI-generated or altered content will also have to carry machine-readable marks so it can be detected more easily.","locator":"Commission enforcement announcement · paragraph 3","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-eu-enforcement","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-ai-act-article-50"],"eventSlugs":["eu-article-50-enforcement-begins"]},{"id":"ev-cn-date","slug":"china-labelling-measures-effective-september-2025","title":"China’s synthetic-content labelling measures entered into force","summary":"Article 14 sets 1 September 2025 as the effective date.","explainer":"The provision fixes when covered providers and platforms became subject to the measures.","whyItMatters":"It supplies the legal date needed to distinguish adoption of the rules from their application.","limitations":"The provision establishes timing; the substantive duties appear in the preceding articles.","exactQuote":"第十四条 本办法自2025年9月1日起施行。","locator":"Article 14","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-cac-labels","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content","visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures"],"eventSlugs":["china-labelling-measures-effective"]},{"id":"ev-convergence","slug":"eu-china-provider-labelling-convergence","title":"EU and Chinese rules converge on provider-side labelling","summary":"Both regimes impose provider-facing duties, although their legal scope and enforcement structure differ.","explainer":"The comparison identifies a shared policy instrument without treating the two regimes as equivalent.","whyItMatters":"Policy lineage depends on tracing the same underlying ask across distinct legal systems.","limitations":"This is cross-source analysis. It should not be read as a claim that terminology, exceptions or enforcement powers are identical.","exactQuote":"服务提供者开展人工智能生成合成内容标识活动，适用本办法。","locator":"China measures · Article 2, read with EU Article 50 material","evidenceType":"inference","documentId":"doc-cac-labels","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["machine-readable-marking-for-ai-content"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china","european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures","eu-ai-act-article-50"],"eventSlugs":[]},{"id":"ev-hr8094-transparency","slug":"hr8094-directs-ftc-foundation-model-disclosures","title":"H.R. 8094 directs the FTC to establish foundation-model disclosure rules","summary":"The bill would require regulations covering training data, documentation, testing, inference-time collection and model operations.","explainer":"The proposal uses FTC rulemaking and disclosure rather than a predeployment approval system.","whyItMatters":"It is a concrete federal vehicle for model transparency and evaluation disclosure.","limitations":"The bill is introduced legislation, not current law, and it does not itself create mandatory government predeployment evaluations.","exactQuote":"Establish requirements for covered entities with regard to foundation models to improve transparency of training data, documentation, testing, data collection during inference, and operations of foundation models, before commercial deployment and during the lifecycle of the system.","locator":"H.R. 8094 · Section 2(a)(1)(A)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-hr8094","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["foundation-model-public-disclosure-rules"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","don-beyer","federal-trade-commission"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-8094-ai-foundation-model-transparency-act"],"eventSlugs":["hr-8094-introduced"]},{"id":"ev-cac-agents","slug":"china-agent-guidance-defines-lifecycle-governance","title":"China’s agent guidance links development to lifecycle governance","summary":"The guidance defines agents by autonomous capabilities and places safety requirements across research, deployment and promotion.","explainer":"It joins industrial-development policy with standards, monitoring and governance measures for autonomous systems.","whyItMatters":"The record is an early national policy statement focused specifically on AI agents rather than generative models generally.","limitations":"The document is policy guidance. Subsequent binding rules and technical standards determine concrete compliance duties.","exactQuote":"坚持安全可控，将智能体安全、可靠、可信作为发展的底线要求，贯穿智能体技术研发、应用部署与推广的全过程，切实防范系统性风险。","locator":"Implementation Opinions · Section I guiding principles","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-cac-agent-guidance","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"eventSlugs":["china-agent-guidance-issued"]},{"id":"ev-cac-agents-definition","slug":"china-agent-guidance-defines-ai-agents","title":"China’s agent guidance defines AI agents by five capabilities","summary":"The opinions define an AI agent as an intelligent system with autonomous perception, memory, decision, interaction and execution capabilities.","explainer":"The definition sits in the lead and frames the rest of the technology, safety and application sections.","whyItMatters":"It separates agent policy from generative-model labelling regimes that do not use this capability stack.","limitations":"The definition is policy guidance vocabulary. Later standards and binding rules may refine product categories.","exactQuote":"智能体是具备自主感知、记忆、决策、交互与执行能力的智能系统，是人工智能产品及服务的重要形态。","locator":"Implementation Opinions · lead definition","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-cac-agent-guidance","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"eventSlugs":["china-agent-guidance-issued"]},{"id":"ev-cac-agents-decision-rights","slug":"china-agent-guidance-user-final-decision-rights","title":"China’s agent guidance keeps final decision rights with users","summary":"Item 6 requires that users retain informed consent and final decision rights over agent autonomous decisions, and that agent actions stay inside user authorisation.","explainer":"The opinions treat decision-permission boundaries as a product-criteria duty under the safety chapter.","whyItMatters":"It states a user-control baseline for autonomous agents without converting the opinions into a statute.","limitations":"The clause is guidance. Binding permission rules arrive through later instruments and standards.","exactQuote":"确保用户对智能体自主决策享有知情权和最终决策权，智能体执行操作不得超出用户授权范围。","locator":"Implementation Opinions · Section III · item 6","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-cac-agent-guidance","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"eventSlugs":["china-agent-guidance-issued"]},{"id":"ev-cac-agents-graded-governance","slug":"china-agent-guidance-classified-graded-governance","title":"China’s agent guidance sets classified and graded governance","summary":"Item 11 directs cyberspace and sector authorities to set open scenes in sensitive and key industries, with filing, testing and problem-product recall measures under applicable law and standards.","explainer":"Lower-risk life and office uses are steered toward self-testing, reporting, distribution-platform management and industry self-regulation.","whyItMatters":"It previews a dual-track administrative approach rather than a single horizontal ban list.","limitations":"Item 11 points to later administrative measures for scene lists and filing mechanics; cyberspace and sector authorities set open scenes under applicable law and standards.","exactQuote":"对于敏感领域及重点行业，由网信部门联合行业主管部门确定开放场景，根据相关法律法规、监管要求和安全防护标准，实行备案、检测、问题产品召回等管理措施。","locator":"Implementation Opinions · Section III · item 11","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-cac-agent-guidance","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["lifecycle-governance-for-ai-agents"],"actorSlugs":["cyberspace-administration-of-china","national-development-and-reform-commission","ministry-of-industry-and-information-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["china"],"vehicleSlugs":["china-ai-agent-development-guidance"],"eventSlugs":["china-agent-guidance-issued"]},{"id":"ev-hr9442-moratorium","slug":"hr9442-proposes-ai-data-center-moratorium","title":"H.R. 9442 proposes a conditional moratorium on AI data centres","summary":"The bill would stop construction or upgrading of covered facilities until specified safeguards are enacted and Congress expressly ends the pause.","explainer":"The proposal ties new compute infrastructure to prior federal action on product review, workers, consumers, climate and community consent.","whyItMatters":"It turns infrastructure constraints into a direct federal policy ask rather than a reporting or permitting reform alone.","limitations":"The measure is introduced legislation and has not passed either chamber of Congress.","exactQuote":"The construction or upgrading of new or existing artificial intelligence data centers may not commence or proceed until—","locator":"H.R. 9442 · Section 3(b)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-hr9442","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","alexandria-ocasio-cortez"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act"],"eventSlugs":["hr-9442-introduced"]},{"id":"ev-hr9442-reporting","slug":"hr9442-requires-quarterly-data-center-reporting","title":"H.R. 9442 would require quarterly public infrastructure reporting","summary":"The bill directs the Energy Secretary to publish facility-level information on water, energy, emissions, labour and other impacts.","explainer":"The reporting provision would create an ongoing public record alongside the proposed construction pause.","whyItMatters":"It shows that the vehicle contains a transparency programme as well as a moratorium.","limitations":"The reporting obligation would apply only if the bill became law.","exactQuote":"The Secretary of Energy shall— (A) submit to Congress quarterly reports on artificial intelligence data centers; and (B) make those quarterly reports publicly available.","locator":"H.R. 9442 · Section 3(c)(1)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-hr9442","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres"],"actorSlugs":["united-states-congress","alexandria-ocasio-cortez"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act"],"eventSlugs":["hr-9442-introduced"]},{"id":"ev-sb53-framework","slug":"california-requires-frontier-ai-framework-publication","title":"California requires large frontier developers to publish a frontier AI framework","summary":"Business and Professions Code section 22757.12(a) requires covered developers to write, implement, comply with and publish a frontier AI framework.","explainer":"The duty is a public-framework and transparency obligation for large frontier developers, not a federal predeployment licensing regime.","whyItMatters":"It creates a state-level vehicle for catastrophic-risk assessment disclosure and annual framework review.","limitations":"Coverage depends on statutory definitions of frontier model and large frontier developer, which the Department of Technology must revisit annually from 2027.","exactQuote":"A large frontier developer shall write, implement, comply with, and clearly and conspicuously publish on its internet website a frontier AI framework that applies to the large frontier developer’s frontier models and describes how the large frontier developer approaches all of the following:","locator":"Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.12(a)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-ca-sb53-code","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature","scott-wiener","california-office-of-emergency-services"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["california-sb-53-tfiaa"],"eventSlugs":["california-sb53-effective"]},{"id":"ev-sb53-effective","slug":"california-tfiaa-effective-january-2026","title":"California’s frontier AI transparency chapter took effect on 1 January 2026","summary":"The chaptered statute records an effective date of 1 January 2026.","explainer":"Effective-date language distinguishes enactment in September 2025 from operative duties beginning in January 2026.","whyItMatters":"It supplies the legal date needed to treat the framework and reporting duties as current California law.","limitations":"Effective-date text does not itself list every substantive duty; those appear in sections 22757.12 to 22757.15.","exactQuote":"(Added by Stats. 2025, Ch. 138, Sec. 2. (SB 53) Effective January 1, 2026.)","locator":"Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.10 historical note","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-ca-sb53-code","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["frontier-developer-public-safety-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["california-legislature"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["california-sb-53-tfiaa"],"eventSlugs":["california-sb53-effective"]},{"id":"ev-oecd-definition","slug":"oecd-ai-system-definition-2024","title":"OECD Recommendation defines an AI system for adherents","summary":"The revised Recommendation states a shared definition of an AI system used across many national frameworks.","explainer":"The definition is soft law. Domestic statutes and regulations determine whether and how it is incorporated.","whyItMatters":"It is a common reference point for interoperability claims in EU, US and other instruments.","limitations":"The Recommendation does not create directly enforceable private rights in domestic courts.","exactQuote":"AI system: An AI system is a machine-based system that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. Different AI systems vary in their levels of autonomy and adaptiveness after deployment.","locator":"OECD/LEGAL/0449 · Section I definition of AI system","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-oecd-recommendation","questionSlugs":["should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules"],"askSlugs":["adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles"],"actorSlugs":["oecd-council"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["oecd-recommendation-on-ai"],"eventSlugs":["oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-2024"]},{"id":"ev-oecd-revision-date","slug":"oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-may-2024","title":"OECD Council revised the AI Recommendation on 3 May 2024","summary":"The legal-instrument text records the May 2024 ministerial revision addressing generative AI and related developments.","explainer":"The revision date marks an update to an existing 2019 Recommendation rather than a new binding treaty.","whyItMatters":"It distinguishes the original 2019 adoption from the current operative soft-law text.","limitations":"The preamble date alone does not list every amended principle; the operative sections do.","exactQuote":"Recommendation was revised by the OECD Council meeting at Ministerial level on 3 May 2024 to reflect technological and policy developments, including with respect to generative AI, and to further facilitate its implementation.","locator":"OECD/LEGAL/0449 · introductory history","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-oecd-recommendation","questionSlugs":["should-intergovernmental-ai-principles-guide-national-rules"],"askSlugs":["adopt-oecd-ai-system-definition-and-principles"],"actorSlugs":["oecd-council"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["oecd-recommendation-on-ai"],"eventSlugs":["oecd-ai-recommendation-revised-2024"]},{"id":"ev-nist-voluntary","slug":"nist-ai-rmf-voluntary-use","title":"NIST states the AI RMF is intended for voluntary use","summary":"NIST’s AI RMF overview describes the framework as voluntary and designed to improve trustworthiness risk management.","explainer":"Voluntary status means organisations may adopt the RMF without a federal mandate from the framework itself.","whyItMatters":"It separates standards-based risk management from statutory evaluation or licensing duties.","limitations":"Other laws or contracts may still require RMF-aligned practices even though the framework text is voluntary.","exactQuote":"The NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) is intended for voluntary use and to improve the ability to incorporate trustworthiness considerations into the design, development, use, and evaluation of AI products, services, and systems.","locator":"NIST AI RMF overview page · Overview of the AI RMF","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-nist-ai-rmf","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["voluntary-ai-risk-management-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["national-institute-of-standards-and-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["nist-ai-risk-management-framework"],"eventSlugs":["nist-ai-rmf-released"]},{"id":"ev-unesco-adoption","slug":"unesco-ethics-recommendation-adopted-2021","title":"UNESCO Member States adopted the AI ethics recommendation in November 2021","summary":"UNESCO’s official page states that 193 Member States adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in November 2021.","explainer":"The instrument is a UNESCO recommendation. Implementation depends on national follow-up rather than direct judicial enforcement.","whyItMatters":"It is the first global standard on AI ethics adopted across UNESCO’s membership.","limitations":"The overview page summarises values and principles; detailed obligations appear in the full recommendation text.","exactQuote":"In November 2021, UNESCO's 193 Member States adopted the first global standard on AI ethics: the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.","locator":"UNESCO Recommendation overview · lead","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-unesco-ethics","questionSlugs":["should-states-implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"askSlugs":["implement-unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation"],"actorSlugs":["unesco-member-states"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["unesco-recommendation-ethics-of-ai"],"eventSlugs":["unesco-ai-ethics-recommendation-adopted"]},{"id":"ev-eu-gpai-code","slug":"eu-gpai-code-published-july-2025","title":"Commission received the final GPAI Code of Practice on 10 July 2025","summary":"The Commission announcement records receipt of the final voluntary Code covering transparency, copyright and safety/security chapters.","explainer":"The Code is a voluntary compliance tool for AI Act GPAI provider duties, not a substitute for the Act itself.","whyItMatters":"It creates a concrete path providers may use to demonstrate GPAI compliance under the AI Act timetable.","limitations":"Adequacy endorsement and later enforcement dates determine how far adherence reduces administrative risk.","exactQuote":"The European Commission has received the final version of the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice, a voluntary tool developed by 13 independent experts, with input from over 1,000 stakeholders, including model providers, small and medium-sized enterprises, academics, AI safety experts, rightsholders, and civil society organisations.","locator":"Commission announcement · 10 July 2025","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-eu-gpai-code","questionSlugs":["should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["gpai-code-of-practice-compliance-path"],"actorSlugs":["european-commission-ai-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"],"vehicleSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-of-practice"],"eventSlugs":["eu-gpai-code-published"]},{"id":"ev-iea-demand-2025","slug":"iea-data-centre-electricity-grew-17-percent-2025","title":"IEA reports data-centre electricity demand grew 17% in 2025","summary":"The IEA executive summary states global data-centre electricity demand grew 17% in 2025 and AI-focused centres grew 50%.","explainer":"The figures are IEA analytical estimates, not a legal obligation. They inform infrastructure and energy-policy debates.","whyItMatters":"They quantify the energy stake in AI data-centre growth-control and planning debates.","limitations":"Projections and growth rates depend on IEA modelling assumptions and available industry data.","exactQuote":"The global electricity demand of data centres – the critical infrastructure for training and running AI models – grew by 17% in 2025, in line with IEA projections. Electricity consumption from AI-focused data centres grew even faster, surging 50% in 2025.","locator":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI · Executive summary","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-iea-energy-ai-exec","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["moratorium-on-new-ai-data-centres","publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections"],"actorSlugs":["international-energy-agency"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai"],"eventSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-ai-published"]},{"id":"ev-iea-2030-projection","slug":"iea-projects-data-centre-demand-near-950-twh-2030","title":"IEA projects data-centre electricity near 950 TWh by 2030","summary":"The IEA central projection roughly doubles data-centre electricity from 485 TWh in 2025 to 950 TWh in 2030.","explainer":"The projection is a forecast with stated bottlenecks reducing the likelihood of more aggressive near-term scenarios.","whyItMatters":"It supplies a shared numerical baseline for grid planning and AI infrastructure policy.","limitations":"The same summary notes upside cases and supply-chain constraints that can change outcomes after 2030.","exactQuote":"Our updated projections see electricity consumption from data centres roughly doubling from 485 TWh in 2025 to 950 TWh in 2030, accounting for around 3% of global electricity demand by that date.","locator":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI · Executive summary","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-iea-energy-ai-exec","questionSlugs":["should-ai-data-centers-face-growth-controls"],"askSlugs":["publish-ai-data-centre-electricity-demand-projections"],"actorSlugs":["international-energy-agency"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai"],"eventSlugs":["iea-key-questions-energy-ai-published"]},{"id":"ev-coe-aim","slug":"coe-convention-aims-human-rights-democracy-rule-of-law","title":"CoE Framework Convention aims to keep AI consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law","summary":"Article 1(1) states the Convention’s aim for activities across the AI lifecycle.","explainer":"The provision sets the treaty’s purpose. Domestic effect still depends on signature, ratification and implementing measures.","whyItMatters":"It is the first binding multilateral AI treaty framed around human rights, democracy and the rule of law.","limitations":"Aim language is not itself an entry-into-force finding. Ratification status must be checked separately.","exactQuote":"The provisions of this Convention aim to ensure that activities within the lifecycle of artificial intelligence systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law.","locator":"CETS No. 225 · Article 1(1)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-coe-cets-225","questionSlugs":["should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties"],"askSlugs":["ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai"],"actorSlugs":["council-of-europe-committee-on-ai"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-ai"],"eventSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-opened"]},{"id":"ev-coe-eif","slug":"coe-convention-entry-into-force-rule","title":"CoE Framework Convention sets a five-party entry-into-force rule","summary":"Article 30(3) requires five consenting parties, including at least three Council of Europe member States.","explainer":"The clause defines when the treaty becomes binding among Parties. It does not by itself prove the threshold has been met.","whyItMatters":"It separates signature theatre from legal entry into force.","limitations":"As of the Treaty Office chart dated 20 July 2026, one ratification (European Union) is below Article 30(3)’s five-party threshold including at least three Council of Europe member States, so the Convention is not in force.","exactQuote":"This Convention shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the expiration of a period of three months after the date on which five signatories, including at least three member States of the Council of Europe, have expressed their consent to be bound by this Convention…","locator":"CETS No. 225 · Article 30(3)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-coe-cets-225","questionSlugs":["should-states-join-binding-ai-human-rights-treaties"],"askSlugs":["ratify-coe-framework-convention-on-ai"],"actorSlugs":["council-of-europe-committee-on-ai"],"jurisdictionSlugs":[],"vehicleSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-ai"],"eventSlugs":["coe-framework-convention-opened"]},{"id":"ev-bis-ear","slug":"bis-revises-ear-advanced-computing-ics","title":"BIS revises EAR rules for advanced computing integrated circuits","summary":"The 16 January 2025 interim final rule revises EAR controls regarding advanced computing ICs.","explainer":"The rule is binding US export-control law under the EAR, not a voluntary AI ethics code.","whyItMatters":"It is a concrete federal vehicle for restricting advanced compute relevant to frontier AI.","limitations":"ECCN notes, exceptions and later amendments determine which shipments actually require licences.","exactQuote":"BIS is revising the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) … regarding advanced computing integrated circuits (ICs).","locator":"Federal Register · FR 2025-00711 · SUMMARY","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-bis-ifr-2025-01-16","questionSlugs":["should-advanced-ai-chips-face-export-controls"],"askSlugs":["control-advanced-computing-ics-under-ear"],"actorSlugs":["bureau-of-industry-and-security"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["bis-advanced-computing-ifr-jan-2025"],"eventSlugs":["bis-advanced-computing-ifr-effective"]},{"id":"ev-japan-purpose","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act-purpose","title":"Japan’s AI Promotion Act frames AI as fundamental economic and social technology","summary":"Article 1 states the statute’s purpose around research, development and utilization of AI-related technology.","explainer":"The Act is a promotion and coordination statute, not an EU-style horizontal prohibitions regime.","whyItMatters":"It records Japan’s choice of promotion legislation plus guidelines rather than a single bans-heavy AI Act.","limitations":"Purpose language does not list every later guideline or sectoral duty.","exactQuote":"a fundamental technology for the development of Japan's economy and society","locator":"Act No. 53 of 2025 · Article 1 (purpose clause, Japanese Law Translation)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-japan-ai-promotion","questionSlugs":["should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans"],"askSlugs":["enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes"],"actorSlugs":["japan-cabinet-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"],"vehicleSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act"],"eventSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act-enacted"]},{"id":"ev-japan-guidelines","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act-international-norms-guidelines","title":"Japan’s AI Promotion Act directs national guidelines aligned with international norms","summary":"Article 13 requires the national government to establish guidelines in accordance with the purport of international norms.","explainer":"The duty is to establish guidelines. Content and enforcement still depend on subsequent instruments.","whyItMatters":"It links domestic soft guidance to international norms inside a promotion statute.","limitations":"The article does not itself create private rights of action.","exactQuote":"The national government is to establish guidelines in accordance with the purport of the international norms…","locator":"Act No. 53 of 2025 · Article 13","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-japan-ai-promotion","questionSlugs":["should-states-prefer-ai-promotion-statutes-to-horizontal-bans"],"askSlugs":["enact-ai-promotion-and-guidelines-statutes"],"actorSlugs":["japan-cabinet-office"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"],"vehicleSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act"],"eventSlugs":["japan-ai-promotion-act-enacted"]},{"id":"ev-c2pa-purpose","slug":"c2pa-spec-defines-provenance-standard","title":"C2PA specifies a technical standard for content provenance and authenticity","summary":"The specification states C2PA developed a technical standard for providing content provenance and authenticity.","explainer":"C2PA is an industry open standard. Mandating it in law is a separate policy ask.","whyItMatters":"It is the main voluntary technical baseline cited in labelling and provenance debates.","limitations":"The specification expressly avoids value judgments about whether provenance data is good or bad.","exactQuote":"To address this issue at scale … the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) has developed this technical specification for providing content provenance and authenticity.","locator":"C2PA Specification 2.3 · §1.1","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-c2pa-spec","questionSlugs":["should-watermarking-standards-be-mandatory"],"askSlugs":["adopt-open-content-provenance-standards"],"actorSlugs":["coalition-for-content-provenance-and-authenticity"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"],"vehicleSlugs":["c2pa-content-credentials-spec"],"eventSlugs":["c2pa-spec-2-3-published"]},{"id":"ev-uk-principles","slug":"uk-white-paper-five-non-statutory-principles","title":"UK white paper keeps AI principles non-statutory initially","summary":"The white paper states principles will be issued on a non-statutory basis and implemented by existing regulators.","explainer":"This is a deliberate institutional design: sector regulators first, statute later if needed.","whyItMatters":"It is the clearest UK statement preferring regulator-owned principles over an early horizontal AI Act.","limitations":"Later UK legislation or AISI practice may change the mix; this quote is the 2023 white paper position.","exactQuote":"We will not put these principles on a statutory footing initially. … Instead, the principles will be issued on a non-statutory basis and implemented by existing regulators.","locator":"UK AI regulation white paper · paragraph 11","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-uk-ai-white-paper","questionSlugs":["should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["implement-ai-principles-through-existing-regulators"],"actorSlugs":["uk-department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"],"vehicleSlugs":["uk-ai-regulation-white-paper"],"eventSlugs":["uk-ai-white-paper-published"]},{"id":"ev-korea-effective","slug":"korea-ai-basic-act-effective-january-2026","title":"Korea’s AI Basic Act took effect on 22 January 2026","summary":"MSIT states the AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree come into force on 22 January 2026.","explainer":"The announcement fixes the operative date and notes a grace period of at least one year for most penalties.","whyItMatters":"It establishes Asia’s first comprehensive AI statute as current law subject to grace-period administration.","limitations":"The English press release summarises Enforcement Decree duties; Korean statutory text remains authoritative for litigation.","exactQuote":"The Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister: Bae Kyung-hoon) announced that the Basic Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and the Establishment of a Trustworthy Foundation (“AI Basic Act”) comes into effect on January 22.","locator":"MSIT press release · lead","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-msit-ai-basic-act","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled","should-frontier-models-face-mandatory-evaluations"],"askSlugs":["korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties"],"actorSlugs":["korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["south-korea"],"vehicleSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act"],"eventSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act-effective"]},{"id":"ev-korea-labelling","slug":"korea-enforcement-decree-generative-ai-labelling","title":"Korea’s Enforcement Decree requires clear labelling of generative AI outputs","summary":"MSIT describes Enforcement Decree Article 23 duties to inform users and clearly label generative AI outputs, including deepfakes.","explainer":"The English release attributes the labelling mechanics to the Enforcement Decree accompanying the AI Basic Act.","whyItMatters":"It adds a statutory Korean vehicle to the labelling ask alongside EU and Chinese measures.","limitations":"Grace-period administration defers most penalties for at least one year except serious-harm cases.","exactQuote":"For outputs generated by generative AI, including AI-manipulated content (deepfakes) that may raise social concerns, the decree requires clear labeling in a manner that can be easily recognized by users, taking into account factors such as age.","locator":"MSIT press release · Enforcement Decree key feature ⑥ Obligation to Ensure Transparency (Article 23)","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-msit-ai-basic-act","questionSlugs":["should-ai-generated-content-be-labelled"],"askSlugs":["visible-disclosure-for-deepfakes","korea-generative-ai-transparency-duties"],"actorSlugs":["korea-ministry-of-science-and-ict"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["south-korea"],"vehicleSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act"],"eventSlugs":["korea-ai-basic-act-effective"]},{"id":"ev-imda-voluntary","slug":"singapore-model-framework-voluntary","title":"Singapore’s Model AI Governance Framework is voluntary","summary":"The second edition describes the Model Framework as a voluntary, ready-to-use tool.","explainer":"Singapore’s approach relies on voluntary frameworks and testing tools rather than an omnibus AI Act.","whyItMatters":"It is a leading soft-law alternative in the institutional-design debate.","limitations":"Later agentic-AI factsheets extend the toolkit but do not convert the framework into binding statute.","exactQuote":"voluntary Model Framework as a general, ready-to-use tool…","locator":"Model AI Governance Framework (Second Edition) · §2.2","evidenceType":"explicit","documentId":"doc-imda-model-framework","questionSlugs":["should-sector-regulators-own-ai-rules"],"askSlugs":["publish-voluntary-national-ai-governance-frameworks"],"actorSlugs":["singapore-imda"],"jurisdictionSlugs":["singapore"],"vehicleSlugs":["singapore-model-ai-governance-framework"],"eventSlugs":["singapore-model-framework-2nd-ed"]}],"sources":[{"id":"source-european-commission","slug":"european-commission","name":"European Commission","kind":"government","summary":"Primary EU source for AI Act implementation, guidance and enforcement material.","homepageUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/artificial-intelligence","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-cac","slug":"cyberspace-administration-of-china","name":"Cyberspace Administration of China","kind":"government","summary":"Primary publisher of China’s internet, algorithm and AI-service governance measures.","homepageUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"]},{"id":"source-congress","slug":"congress-gov","name":"Congress.gov","kind":"legislature","summary":"The official United States legislative information service operated by Congress.","homepageUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-reed-smith","slug":"reed-smith","name":"Reed Smith","kind":"specialist","summary":"Legal analysis of technology regulation and AI Act implementation.","homepageUrl":"https://www.reedsmith.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-eu-ai-act","slug":"eu-artificial-intelligence-act","name":"EU Artificial Intelligence Act","kind":"specialist","summary":"Independent specialist reference and practical commentary on the EU AI Act.","homepageUrl":"https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-alston","slug":"alston-bird-privacy-blog","name":"Alston & Bird Privacy, Cyber & Data Strategy","kind":"specialist","summary":"Legal analysis of United States privacy, cyber and AI-policy proposals.","homepageUrl":"https://www.alstonprivacy.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-govtrack","slug":"govtrack","name":"GovTrack","kind":"specialist","summary":"Independent tracking and contextual information for United States legislation.","homepageUrl":"https://www.govtrack.us/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-xinhua","slug":"xinhua","name":"Xinhua","kind":"media","summary":"China’s state news agency and a source of official policy announcements.","homepageUrl":"https://www.news.cn/","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"]},{"id":"source-yicai","slug":"yicai","name":"Yicai","kind":"media","summary":"Chinese business and financial news coverage of technology and industrial policy.","homepageUrl":"https://www.yicai.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["china"]},{"id":"source-dcd","slug":"data-center-dynamics","name":"Data Center Dynamics","kind":"specialist","summary":"Specialist reporting on data-centre infrastructure, energy and regulation.","homepageUrl":"https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-california-leginfo","slug":"california-legislative-information","name":"California Legislative Information","kind":"legislature","summary":"Official California bill text, chaptered statutes and code display.","homepageUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["california","united-states"]},{"id":"source-oecd","slug":"oecd","name":"OECD","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Intergovernmental publisher of the OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence.","homepageUrl":"https://oecd.ai/en/ai-principles","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-oecd-legal","slug":"oecd-legal-instruments","name":"OECD Legal Instruments","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Official repository for OECD Council Recommendations and related legal instruments.","homepageUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-nist","slug":"nist","name":"National Institute of Standards and Technology","kind":"standards-body","summary":"US federal standards body publishing the AI Risk Management Framework and profiles.","homepageUrl":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-unesco","slug":"unesco","name":"UNESCO","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"UN specialized agency that adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.","homepageUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-coe","slug":"council-of-europe","name":"Council of Europe","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Publisher of the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (CETS No. 225).","homepageUrl":"https://www.coe.int/en/web/artificial-intelligence/the-framework-convention-on-artificial-intelligence","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-iea","slug":"international-energy-agency","name":"International Energy Agency","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Intergovernmental energy analysis including data-centre and AI electricity demand.","homepageUrl":"https://www.iea.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-uk-aisi","slug":"uk-ai-security-institute","name":"UK AI Security Institute","kind":"government","summary":"UK government institute for AI evaluation, security research and international technical cooperation.","homepageUrl":"https://www.aisi.gov.uk/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-uk-dsit","slug":"uk-dsit","name":"UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","kind":"government","summary":"UK department publishing national AI policy, regulatory coordination and white papers.","homepageUrl":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-msit-korea","slug":"korea-msit","name":"Ministry of Science and ICT (Korea)","kind":"government","summary":"Lead Korean ministry for AI Basic Act implementation and related guidance.","homepageUrl":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/","jurisdictionSlugs":["south-korea"]},{"id":"source-imda","slug":"singapore-imda","name":"Infocomm Media Development Authority","kind":"government","summary":"Singapore authority behind the Model AI Governance Framework and AI Verify work.","homepageUrl":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/","jurisdictionSlugs":["singapore"]},{"id":"source-meti","slug":"japan-meti","name":"Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (Japan)","kind":"government","summary":"Japanese ministry publishing AI business guidelines and industrial AI policy.","homepageUrl":"https://www.meti.go.jp/english/","jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"]},{"id":"source-ised","slug":"canada-ised","name":"Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada","kind":"government","summary":"Canadian federal department for digital and AI industrial policy.","homepageUrl":"https://ised-isde.canada.ca/","jurisdictionSlugs":["canada"]},{"id":"source-c2pa","slug":"c2pa","name":"Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity","kind":"standards-body","summary":"Multi-stakeholder technical standard for content credentials and provenance.","homepageUrl":"https://c2pa.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-bis","slug":"us-bis","name":"Bureau of Industry and Security","kind":"government","summary":"US Commerce bureau administering export controls on advanced computing and AI chips.","homepageUrl":"https://www.bis.doc.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-whitehouse","slug":"white-house","name":"The White House","kind":"government","summary":"US executive-branch publisher of AI executive orders, fact sheets and strategy documents.","homepageUrl":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-brookings","slug":"brookings","name":"Brookings Institution","kind":"think-tank","summary":"US think tank publishing AI governance research and policy analysis.","homepageUrl":"https://www.brookings.edu/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-cset","slug":"cset","name":"Center for Security and Emerging Technology","kind":"think-tank","summary":"Georgetown research centre translating and analysing foreign AI policy and technology documents.","homepageUrl":"https://cset.georgetown.edu/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-stanford-hai","slug":"stanford-hai","name":"Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence","kind":"academia","summary":"Academic publisher of the AI Index and related measurement research.","homepageUrl":"https://hai.stanford.edu/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-ada-lovelace","slug":"ada-lovelace-institute","name":"Ada Lovelace Institute","kind":"civil-society","summary":"UK independent research institute on AI, data and society.","homepageUrl":"https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-future-of-privacy","slug":"future-of-privacy-forum","name":"Future of Privacy Forum","kind":"civil-society","summary":"Privacy and technology policy organisation publishing comparative AI regulation analysis.","homepageUrl":"https://fpf.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-epic","slug":"epic","name":"Electronic Privacy Information Center","kind":"civil-society","summary":"US public-interest organisation focused on privacy, speech and algorithmic accountability.","homepageUrl":"https://epic.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-access-now","slug":"access-now","name":"Access Now","kind":"civil-society","summary":"Digital-rights organisation covering AI regulation, surveillance and human-rights impacts.","homepageUrl":"https://www.accessnow.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union","united-states"]},{"id":"source-human-rights-watch","slug":"human-rights-watch","name":"Human Rights Watch","kind":"civil-society","summary":"International NGO reporting on AI, surveillance and rights impacts.","homepageUrl":"https://www.hrw.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-rand","slug":"rand","name":"RAND Corporation","kind":"think-tank","summary":"Research organisation publishing AI security, governance and defence analysis.","homepageUrl":"https://www.rand.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-carnegie","slug":"carnegie-endowment","name":"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace","kind":"think-tank","summary":"Think tank covering AI geopolitics, export controls and international governance.","homepageUrl":"https://carnegieendowment.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-chatham","slug":"chatham-house","name":"Chatham House","kind":"think-tank","summary":"UK international-affairs institute publishing AI governance and security research.","homepageUrl":"https://www.chathamhouse.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-bruegel","slug":"bruegel","name":"Bruegel","kind":"think-tank","summary":"European economics think tank analysing EU digital and AI regulation.","homepageUrl":"https://www.bruegel.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-cerre","slug":"cerre","name":"Centre on Regulation in Europe","kind":"think-tank","summary":"European regulatory think tank covering AI Act implementation and digital markets.","homepageUrl":"https://cerre.eu/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-oxford-insights","slug":"oxford-insights","name":"Oxford Insights","kind":"specialist","summary":"Publisher of the Government AI Readiness Index and related policy rankings.","homepageUrl":"https://oxfordinsights.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-gpai","slug":"gpai","name":"Global Partnership on AI","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Multilateral partnership producing AI policy research now integrated with OECD.AI work.","homepageUrl":"https://gpai.ai/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-iso","slug":"iso","name":"International Organization for Standardization","kind":"standards-body","summary":"International standards body developing AI management and risk standards such as ISO/IEC 42001.","homepageUrl":"https://www.iso.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-ieee","slug":"ieee","name":"IEEE","kind":"standards-body","summary":"Professional standards organisation publishing AI ethics and technical standards.","homepageUrl":"https://www.ieee.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-wto","slug":"wto","name":"World Trade Organization","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Multilateral trade body whose e-commerce and goods rules intersect AI compute and services trade.","homepageUrl":"https://www.wto.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-wipo","slug":"wipo","name":"World Intellectual Property Organization","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"UN IP agency covering AI and intellectual-property policy, copyright and patent issues.","homepageUrl":"https://www.wipo.int/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-itu","slug":"itu","name":"International Telecommunication Union","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"UN agency for ICT standards and AI-for-good programmes.","homepageUrl":"https://www.itu.int/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-world-bank","slug":"world-bank","name":"World Bank","kind":"international-organisation","summary":"Development institution publishing digital-economy and AI readiness research for governments.","homepageUrl":"https://www.worldbank.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":[]},{"id":"source-pew","slug":"pew-research","name":"Pew Research Center","kind":"academia","summary":"Survey research organisation publishing public-opinion data on AI and technology.","homepageUrl":"https://www.pewresearch.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-you-gov","slug":"yougov","name":"YouGov","kind":"specialist","summary":"Polling firm publishing cross-national surveys on AI attitudes and regulation.","homepageUrl":"https://yougov.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom","united-states"]},{"id":"source-euractiv","slug":"euractiv","name":"Euractiv","kind":"media","summary":"European policy media covering EU digital and AI Act developments.","homepageUrl":"https://www.euractiv.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union"]},{"id":"source-politico-pro","slug":"politico","name":"POLITICO","kind":"media","summary":"Political reporting outlet covering AI legislation in the US and Europe.","homepageUrl":"https://www.politico.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","european-union"]},{"id":"source-reuters","slug":"reuters","name":"Reuters","kind":"media","summary":"Wire service reporting on AI regulation, enforcement and industry developments.","homepageUrl":"https://www.reuters.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","european-union","china","united-kingdom"]},{"id":"source-ft","slug":"financial-times","name":"Financial Times","kind":"media","summary":"Business newspaper covering AI infrastructure, regulation and capital expenditure.","homepageUrl":"https://www.ft.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-kingdom","european-union","united-states"]},{"id":"source-lawfare","slug":"lawfare","name":"Lawfare","kind":"specialist","summary":"Specialist legal and security analysis covering AI governance and national security.","homepageUrl":"https://www.lawfaremedia.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-iapp","slug":"iapp","name":"International Association of Privacy Professionals","kind":"specialist","summary":"Professional association publishing AI, privacy and data-protection regulatory trackers.","homepageUrl":"https://iapp.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","european-union"]},{"id":"source-dataguidance","slug":"dataguidance","name":"DataGuidance","kind":"specialist","summary":"Regulatory intelligence service tracking AI and privacy laws by jurisdiction.","homepageUrl":"https://www.dataguidance.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["european-union","united-states","united-kingdom","china"]},{"id":"source-hunton","slug":"hunton-andrews-kurth","name":"Hunton Andrews Kurth Privacy & Cybersecurity","kind":"specialist","summary":"Law-firm analysis of AI, privacy and cybersecurity regulatory developments.","homepageUrl":"https://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","european-union"]},{"id":"source-wilmerhale","slug":"wilmerhale","name":"WilmerHale","kind":"specialist","summary":"Legal analysis covering AI Act, US state AI laws and enforcement risk.","homepageUrl":"https://www.wilmerhale.com/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","european-union"]},{"id":"source-trade-gov","slug":"us-trade-gov","name":"International Trade Administration","kind":"government","summary":"US Commerce market-intelligence notes on foreign AI regulation for exporters.","homepageUrl":"https://www.trade.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states","south-korea","japan","european-union"]},{"id":"source-australia-disr","slug":"australia-disr","name":"Department of Industry, Science and Resources (Australia)","kind":"government","summary":"Australian federal department leading national AI policy and voluntary guardrails work.","homepageUrl":"https://www.industry.gov.au/","jurisdictionSlugs":["australia"]},{"id":"source-meity","slug":"india-meity","name":"Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (India)","kind":"government","summary":"Indian ministry issuing AI advisories and digital-policy instruments.","homepageUrl":"https://www.meity.gov.in/","jurisdictionSlugs":["india"]},{"id":"source-brazil-congress","slug":"brazil-congress","name":"Brazilian National Congress","kind":"legislature","summary":"Brazilian legislature considering national AI bills and related digital statutes.","homepageUrl":"https://www.congressonacional.leg.br/","jurisdictionSlugs":["brazil"]},{"id":"source-govinfo","slug":"govinfo","name":"GovInfo","kind":"government","summary":"US Government Publishing Office repository for Federal Register and other official texts.","homepageUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]},{"id":"source-japan-law-translation","slug":"japan-law-translation","name":"Japanese Law Translation","kind":"government","summary":"Japanese government English translations of statutes, including the AI Promotion Act.","homepageUrl":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/","jurisdictionSlugs":["japan"]},{"id":"source-content-credentials","slug":"content-credentials","name":"Content Credentials","kind":"standards-body","summary":"Public face of C2PA Content Credentials provenance tooling and specification links.","homepageUrl":"https://contentcredentials.org/","jurisdictionSlugs":["united-states"]}],"documents":[{"id":"doc-eu-art50-faq","slug":"eu-article-50-transparency-faq","title":"Transparency obligations under Article 50 of the AI Act","documentType":"Official guidance","sourceId":"source-european-commission","canonicalUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act","publishedAt":"2026-07-24","language":"English","summary":"Commission guidance on scope, timing, enforcement and the limited legacy-system grace period."},{"id":"doc-eu-enforcement","slug":"commission-ai-act-enforcement-announcement","title":"Commission starts enforcing AI Act rules and new transparency requirements","documentType":"Official announcement","sourceId":"source-european-commission","canonicalUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-starts-enforcing-ai-act-rules-and-new-transparency-requirements-2-august","publishedAt":"2026-07-31","language":"English","summary":"The Commission’s account of the enforcement phase beginning on 2 August 2026."},{"id":"doc-cac-labels","slug":"china-ai-generated-content-labelling-measures","title":"AI-Generated Synthetic Content Labelling Measures","documentType":"Administrative measure","sourceId":"source-cac","canonicalUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/14/c_1743654684782215.htm","publishedAt":"2025-03-14","language":"Chinese","summary":"China’s rules for explicit and implicit labels on covered AI-generated synthetic content."},{"id":"doc-hr8094","slug":"hr-8094-ai-foundation-model-transparency-act","title":"H.R. 8094 · AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026","documentType":"Bill","sourceId":"source-congress","canonicalUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8094/text/ih","publishedAt":"2026-03-26","language":"English","summary":"Introduced bill directing the FTC to establish foundation-model disclosure requirements."},{"id":"doc-cac-agent-guidance","slug":"china-ai-agent-development-guidance","title":"Implementation Opinions on Standardized Application and Innovative Development of AI Agents","documentType":"Policy guidance","sourceId":"source-cac","canonicalUrl":"https://www.cac.gov.cn/2026-05/08/c_1779979789523320.htm","publishedAt":"2026-05-08","language":"Chinese","summary":"Joint policy direction for AI-agent development, standards, safety and lifecycle governance."},{"id":"doc-hr9442","slug":"hr-9442-ai-data-center-moratorium-act","title":"H.R. 9442 · Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act","documentType":"Bill","sourceId":"source-congress","canonicalUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9442/text/ih","publishedAt":"2026-06-24","language":"English","summary":"House bill proposing a conditional moratorium on covered AI data-centre construction and upgrades."},{"id":"doc-reed-eu","slug":"reed-smith-eu-ai-act-august-2026","title":"EU AI Act: Next level applies as of 2 August 2026","documentType":"Legal analysis","sourceId":"source-reed-smith","canonicalUrl":"https://www.reedsmith.com/our-insights/blogs/technology-law-dispatch/102nfi5/eu-ai-act-next-level-applies-as-of-2-august-2026/","language":"English","summary":"Specialist account of what entered into application and what the AI Omnibus deferred."},{"id":"doc-eu-ai-practical","slug":"practical-guide-to-article-50","title":"The EU AI Act’s Transparency Rules: A Practical Guide to Article 50","documentType":"Specialist explainer","sourceId":"source-eu-ai-act","canonicalUrl":"https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/transparency-rules-article-50/","publishedAt":"2026-05-14","language":"English","summary":"Practical explanation of Article 50’s provider and deployer obligations."},{"id":"doc-alston-hr8094","slug":"alston-show-your-work-ai","title":"Show Your Work, AI: Congress Pushes for AI Model Transparency","documentType":"Legal analysis","sourceId":"source-alston","canonicalUrl":"https://www.alstonprivacy.com/show-your-work-ai-congress-pushes-for-ai-model-transparency/","language":"English","summary":"Legal explanation of H.R. 8094’s disclosure structure and intended scope."},{"id":"doc-govtrack-hr8094","slug":"govtrack-hr8094","title":"H.R. 8094: AI Foundation Model Transparency Act of 2026","documentType":"Legislative tracker","sourceId":"source-govtrack","canonicalUrl":"https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/hr8094","publishedAt":"2026-03-26","language":"English","summary":"Status, sponsorship and procedural history for H.R. 8094."},{"id":"doc-xinhua-agent","slug":"xinhua-ai-agent-guidance","title":"Three departments issue implementation opinions on AI agents","documentType":"News report","sourceId":"source-xinhua","canonicalUrl":"https://www.news.cn/tech/20260513/9d6b6f3416484ef9b8eab054425b5680/c.html","publishedAt":"2026-05-13","language":"Chinese","summary":"Official-news account of the guidance’s principles, safety measures and application scenarios."},{"id":"doc-yicai-agent","slug":"yicai-ai-agent-governance","title":"Three departments define the boundaries for AI-agent development","documentType":"News analysis","sourceId":"source-yicai","canonicalUrl":"https://www.yicai.com/news/103173263.html","publishedAt":"2026-05-10","language":"Chinese","summary":"Business-news analysis of the policy’s governance and industrial-development provisions."},{"id":"doc-dcd-moratorium","slug":"dcd-ai-data-center-moratorium","title":"Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders introduce AI Data Center Moratorium Act","documentType":"Specialist report","sourceId":"source-dcd","canonicalUrl":"https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/ocasio-cortez-and-sanders-introduce-ai-data-center-moratorium-act/","language":"English","summary":"Infrastructure-industry account of the proposed moratorium and reporting obligations."},{"id":"doc-ca-sb53-code","slug":"california-tfiaa-business-professions-code","title":"California Business and Professions Code Chapter 25.1 · Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act","documentType":"Statute","sourceId":"source-california-leginfo","canonicalUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=&chapter=25.1.&division=8.&lawCode=BPC&part=&title=","publishedAt":"2026-01-01","language":"English","summary":"Chaptered California statute requiring large frontier developers to publish frontier AI frameworks and related transparency reports."},{"id":"doc-oecd-recommendation","slug":"oecd-recommendation-on-artificial-intelligence","title":"OECD Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449)","documentType":"Intergovernmental recommendation","sourceId":"source-oecd-legal","canonicalUrl":"https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/api/print?ids=648&lang=en","publishedAt":"2024-05-03","language":"English","summary":"OECD Council Recommendation first adopted in 2019 and revised in May 2024, including the shared AI-system definition."},{"id":"doc-nist-ai-rmf","slug":"nist-ai-risk-management-framework","title":"NIST AI Risk Management Framework","documentType":"Voluntary framework","sourceId":"source-nist","canonicalUrl":"https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework","publishedAt":"2023-01-26","language":"English","summary":"NIST page describing the voluntary AI RMF 1.0, Generative AI Profile and later critical-infrastructure concept note."},{"id":"doc-unesco-ethics","slug":"unesco-recommendation-ethics-of-ai","title":"UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence","documentType":"Intergovernmental recommendation","sourceId":"source-unesco","canonicalUrl":"https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics","publishedAt":"2021-11-01","language":"English","summary":"UNESCO overview of the ethics recommendation adopted by 193 Member States in November 2021."},{"id":"doc-eu-gpai-code","slug":"eu-gpai-code-of-practice-announcement","title":"General-Purpose AI Code of Practice now available","documentType":"Official announcement","sourceId":"source-european-commission","canonicalUrl":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/general-purpose-ai-code-practice-now-available","publishedAt":"2025-07-10","language":"English","summary":"Commission announcement that the final GPAI Code of Practice was received on 10 July 2025."},{"id":"doc-iea-energy-ai-exec","slug":"iea-key-questions-energy-and-ai-executive-summary","title":"IEA Key Questions on Energy and AI · Executive summary","documentType":"Official analysis","sourceId":"source-iea","canonicalUrl":"https://www.iea.org/reports/key-questions-on-energy-and-ai/executive-summary","publishedAt":"2026-06-01","language":"English","summary":"IEA executive summary stating 2025 data-centre electricity growth and the 2030 demand projection."},{"id":"doc-coe-cets-225","slug":"coe-framework-convention-ai-cets-225","title":"Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (CETS No. 225)","documentType":"Treaty","sourceId":"source-coe","canonicalUrl":"https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c","publishedAt":"2024-09-05","language":"English","summary":"Binding multilateral treaty text opened for signature in Vilnius on 5 September 2024."},{"id":"doc-bis-ifr-2025-01-16","slug":"bis-advanced-computing-ifr-2025-01-16","title":"BIS interim final rule on advanced computing integrated circuits (FR 2025-00711)","documentType":"Federal Register rule","sourceId":"source-govinfo","canonicalUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-16/html/2025-00711.htm","publishedAt":"2025-01-16","language":"English","summary":"BIS revises EAR rules for advanced computing ICs under ECCN 3A090, effective 16 January 2025."},{"id":"doc-japan-ai-promotion","slug":"japan-ai-promotion-act","title":"Act on Promotion of Research and Development, and Utilization of AI-related Technology (Act No. 53 of 2025)","documentType":"Statute","sourceId":"source-japan-law-translation","canonicalUrl":"https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/5066/en","publishedAt":"2025-06-04","language":"English","summary":"Japanese promotion statute establishing national guidelines and transparency-oriented measures for AI-related technology."},{"id":"doc-c2pa-spec","slug":"c2pa-specification-2-3","title":"C2PA Technical Specification 2.3","documentType":"Technical standard","sourceId":"source-c2pa","canonicalUrl":"https://spec.c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/2.3/specs/C2PA_Specification.html","language":"English","summary":"Open technical specification for content provenance and authenticity assertions."},{"id":"doc-uk-ai-white-paper","slug":"uk-ai-regulation-white-paper","title":"AI regulation: a pro-innovation approach (white paper)","documentType":"Policy paper","sourceId":"source-uk-dsit","canonicalUrl":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach/white-paper","publishedAt":"2023-03-29","language":"English","summary":"UK government white paper proposing five non-statutory principles implemented by existing regulators."},{"id":"doc-msit-ai-basic-act","slug":"msit-ai-basic-act-comes-into-force","title":"The AI Basic Act Comes into Force to Lay the Foundation for Korea to Become an AI G3","documentType":"Official press release","sourceId":"source-msit-korea","canonicalUrl":"https://www.msit.go.kr/eng/bbs/view.do?bbsSeqNo=42&mId=4&mPid=2&nttSeqNo=1214&sCode=eng","publishedAt":"2026-01-22","language":"English","summary":"MSIT English announcement that the AI Basic Act and Enforcement Decree take effect on 22 January 2026, with transparency and safety duties."},{"id":"doc-imda-model-framework","slug":"singapore-model-ai-governance-framework-2nd-ed","title":"Model AI Governance Framework (Second Edition)","documentType":"Voluntary framework","sourceId":"source-imda","canonicalUrl":"https://www.imda.gov.sg/-/media/imda/files/infocomm-media-landscape/sg-digital/tech-pillars/artificial-intelligence/second-edition-of-the-model-ai-governance-framework.pdf","publishedAt":"2020-01-21","language":"English","summary":"Singapore voluntary model framework describing explainability, transparency, fairness and human-centric AI use."}]},"meta":{"query":null,"jurisdiction":null,"evidenceStandard":"explicit-and-inferred-separated","schemaVersion":"2026-08-01"}}