What Article 50 and SB 942 actually require.
Fifteen questions, about four minutes. It scores five areas — scope, disclosure, transparency, detection and evidence — and names the gaps a regulator, a distributor or an insurer would find first. Results appear immediately; the email is optional.
Provider or deployer
Two regimes, one set of artifacts.
The duties differ in wording and overlap in practice: both end up asking whether what was published carries provenance somebody else can read.
European Union
Providers must ensure synthetic output carries machine-readable disclosure that is effective, interoperable, robust and reliable. Deployers must disclose deepfakes and AI-generated text published on matters of public interest, with or without intent to deceive.
California
Covered providers must attach latent disclosures carrying provider, system name and version, creation time and a unique identifier, offer a user-visible disclosure that is hard to remove, and publish a free detection tool. Large online platforms must read provenance data from 1 January 2027.
Where this goes next
Platform provenance reading duties land on 1 January 2027 and capture device disclosure on 1 January 2028. China's labelling measures already apply. The assessment flags the ones that need planning now.
See the regulatory picture →Disclosure is the easy half. Governing who may claim, keeping provenance durable through distribution, and being able to show what was asserted a year later is the half that needs infrastructure.