Understanding the Obligations of Limited-Risk AI Systems Under the EU AI Act

Zooming in on AI: Understanding the EU AI Act and Its Obligations for Limited-Risk AI Systems

The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) represents a significant step in the regulation of artificial intelligence technologies within the European Union. This comprehensive framework adopts a risk-based approach, classifying AI systems based on their potential hazards and establishing corresponding obligations for developers and deployers.

Overview of the EU AI Act

The AI Act is distinguished by its detailed categorization of AI systems into various risk levels. Each classification is accompanied by specific requirements aimed at mitigating the risks posed by these technologies. This article focuses on the obligations related to limited-risk AI systems, which are subject to lighter regulatory measures compared to their high-risk counterparts.

Defining Limited-Risk AI Systems

Limited-risk AI systems are those that may interact with individuals or generate content, carrying risks of impersonation or deception. According to the AI Act, these systems are unlikely to cause significant harm or infringe upon fundamental rights.

Examples of limited-risk AI systems include:

  • AI systems that interact directly with users, such as chatbots and digital assistants.
  • Systems that create synthesized content including audio, images, video, or text.
  • Technologies that generate or alter media content, leading to deep fakes.
  • AI systems designed for emotion recognition or biometric categorization.

Transparency Obligations for Limited-Risk AI Systems

To ensure user awareness and safety, the AI Act mandates distinct transparency obligations for both providers and deployers of limited-risk AI systems.

Provider Obligations

As outlined in Articles 50(1) and 50(2), providers must:

  1. Chatbots and Digital Assistants: Ensure that users are informed they are interacting with an AI system unless it is evident to a reasonably informed person.
  2. AI-Generated Synthetic Content: Mark outputs from AI systems in a machine-readable format, ensuring they are identifiable as artificially created or manipulated. Providers must ensure that these solutions are:
    • Effective: Solutions must consistently mark and detect synthetic content.
    • Interoperable: They must function seamlessly across various platforms.
    • Robust: Solutions should maintain effectiveness over time.

These obligations do not apply to AI systems that assist in standard editing functions or do not significantly alter the original data provided.

Deployer Obligations

Articles 50(3) and 50(4) specify obligations for deployers, including:

  1. Deep Fakes: Disclose when content has been artificially generated or manipulated, especially when the content resembles real individuals or events.
  2. AI-Generated Text: Notify users when text intended for public dissemination has been artificially produced or altered.
  3. Emotion Recognition Systems: Inform individuals about the operation of these systems and ensure compliance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Timing and Format of Notices

Information regarding limited-risk AI systems must be communicated clearly during the user’s first interaction. Particular attention should be given to vulnerable groups, ensuring that notifications are accessible to individuals with disabilities.

The Role of the European Commission

The European Commission will review the classification of limited-risk AI systems every four years and facilitate the development of guidelines to implement detection and labeling requirements for generated content.

Interplay with Other Regulations

The transparency requirements under the AI Act complement those established by the GDPR and the Digital Services Act (DSA). Providers of large online platforms must also identify and mitigate risks associated with the dissemination of AI-generated content, ensuring compliance with both sets of regulations.

Enforcement and Compliance

Compliance with transparency obligations is overseen by national authorities, with penalties for non-compliance reaching administrative fines of up to EUR 15 million or 3% of the operator’s total annual turnover.

Conclusion

The EU AI Act marks a pivotal moment in the regulatory landscape of artificial intelligence, particularly concerning limited-risk AI systems. By establishing clear obligations for both providers and deployers, the Act aims to foster transparency, enhance user safety, and promote responsible AI practices across Europe.

More Insights

AI Regulations: Comparing the EU’s AI Act with Australia’s Approach

Global companies need to navigate the differing AI regulations in the European Union and Australia, with the EU's AI Act setting stringent requirements based on risk levels, while Australia adopts a...

Quebec’s New AI Guidelines for Higher Education

Quebec has released its AI policy for universities and Cégeps, outlining guidelines for the responsible use of generative AI in higher education. The policy aims to address ethical considerations and...

AI Literacy: The Compliance Imperative for Businesses

As AI adoption accelerates, regulatory expectations are rising, particularly with the EU's AI Act, which mandates that all staff must be AI literate. This article emphasizes the importance of...

Germany’s Approach to Implementing the AI Act

Germany is moving forward with the implementation of the EU AI Act, designating the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) as the central authority for monitoring compliance and promoting innovation. The...

Global Call for AI Safety Standards by 2026

World leaders and AI pioneers are calling on the United Nations to implement binding global safeguards for artificial intelligence by 2026. This initiative aims to address the growing concerns...

Governance in the Era of AI and Zero Trust

In 2025, AI has transitioned from mere buzz to practical application across various industries, highlighting the urgent need for a robust governance framework aligned with the zero trust economy...

AI Governance Shift: From Regulation to Technical Secretariat

The upcoming governance framework on artificial intelligence in India may introduce a "technical secretariat" to coordinate AI policies across government departments, moving away from the previous...

AI Safety as a Catalyst for Innovation in Global Majority Nations

The commentary discusses the tension between regulating AI for safety and promoting innovation, emphasizing that investments in AI safety and security can foster sustainable development in Global...

ASEAN’s AI Governance: Charting a Distinct Path

ASEAN's approach to AI governance is characterized by a consensus-driven, voluntary, and principles-based framework that allows member states to navigate their unique challenges and capacities...