Artificial Intelligence Act

13 march 2024

The regulation, agreed in negotiations with member states in December 2023, was endorsed by MEPs with 523 votes in favour, 46 against and 49 abstentions.

It aims to protect fundamental rights, democracy, the rule of law and environmental sustainability from high-risk AI, while boosting innovation and establishing Europe as a leader in the field. The regulation establishes obligations for AI based on its potential risks and level of impact.

Banned applications 

The new rules ban certain AI applications that threaten citizens’ rights, including biometric categorisation systems based on sensitive characteristics and untargeted scraping of facial images from the internet or CCTV footage to create facial recognition databases. Emotion recognition in the workplace and schools, social scoring, predictive policing (when it is based solely on profiling a person or assessing their characteristics), and AI that manipulates human behaviour or exploits people’s vulnerabilities will also be forbidden.

Law enforcement exemptions 

The use of biometric identification systems (RBI) by law enforcement is prohibited in principle, except in exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations. “Real-time” RBI can only be deployed if strict safeguards are met, e.g. its use is limited in time and geographic scope and subject to specific prior judicial or administrative authorisation. Such uses may include, for example, a targeted search of a missing person or preventing a terrorist attack. Using such systems post-facto (“post-remote RBI”) is considered a high-risk use case, requiring judicial authorisation being linked to a criminal offence.

Obligations for high-risk systems

Clear obligations are also foreseen for other high-risk AI systems (due to their significant potential harm to health, safety, fundamental rights, environment, democracy and the rule of law). Examples of high-risk AI uses include critical infrastructure, education and vocational training, employment, essential private and public services (e.g. healthcare, banking), certain systems in law enforcement, migration and border management, justice and democratic processes (e.g. influencing elections). Such systems must assess and reduce risks, maintain use logs, be transparent and accurate, and ensure human oversight. Citizens will have a right to submit complaints about AI systems and receive explanations about decisions based on high-risk AI systems that affect their rights.


Transparency requirements 

General-purpose AI (GPAI) systems, and the GPAI models they are based on, must meet certain transparency requirements, including compliance with EU copyright law and publishing detailed summaries of the content used for training. The more powerful GPAI models that could pose systemic risks will face additional requirements, including performing model evaluations, assessing and mitigating systemic risks, and reporting on incidents.

Additionally, artificial or manipulated images, audio or video content (“deepfakes”) need to be clearly labelled as such.

Measures to support innovation and SMEs

Regulatory sandboxes and real-world testing will have to be established at the national level, and made accessible to SMEs and start-ups, to develop and train innovative AI before its placement on the market.

News archive

 

Firm news

gen7

07/01/2026

Legge di Bilancio 2026

L' Art. 1 - Comma 274 della Legge di Bilancio 2026 ha modificato  l'articolo 16 del codice delle comunicazioni elettroniche, di cui al decreto legislativo 1° agosto 2003, n. 259, cosi'

dic23

23/12/2025

ll Garante privacy ha sanzionato Verisure Italia per trattamento illecito di dati personali ai fini di marketing.

  Il provvedimento nasce dal reclamo di un ex cliente, che aveva continuato a ricevere sms promozionali indesiderati, anche dopo essersi opposto al trattamento dei dati, e dalla segnalazione di

dic23

23/12/2025

Definizione della controversia tra Cellnex Italia SpA ed il Comune di Manfredonia (FG) per l’installazione di una rete di comunicazione elettronica ad alta velocità ai sensi del regolamento di cui alla delibera n. 449/16/CONS

Con la delibera n. 42/25/CIR viene definita la controversia tra Cellnex Italia SpA ed il Comune di Manfredonia per l’installazione di una rete di comunicazione elettronica ad alta velocità

Lawyer News

gen7

07/01/2026

La responsabilità dei marketplace online nel trattamento dei dati personali

La Corte di Giustizia UE stabilisce che

gen7

07/01/2026

Rappresentanza organica della società: a chi spetta l'onere della prova?

Quando il potere rappresentativo non deriva

gen7

07/01/2026

Messa alla prova: legittima l’esclusione del delitto di incendio boschivo colposo

<p>La <a href="https://onelegale.wolterskluwer.it/document/10SE0003095711"