The article points at codes of practice it does not contain
The Commission is to encourage codes of practice on detection, marking and related practice, under the procedure in Article 98(2). The technical language the article does carry is a qualifier: solutions must be effective, interoperable, robust and reliable as far as is technically feasible. As of 2026-09-12.
| Point | Where it sits | What the record holds |
|---|---|---|
| Paragraph 7 | Codes of practice to be encouraged | Procedure named in Article 98(2) |
| Paragraph 2 | Effective, interoperable, robust and reliable as far as technically feasible | The article's own technical wording |
| Vendor statements | One states robustness to cropping, filters and frame-rate changes | A vendor's own claim about its own system |
| Recitals | 120 and 132 to 137 | What the text says it is for |
Inclusion rule. Recorded from the article text and from vendor pages, kept in separate rows. A vendor claim is never recorded as a standard. Order. From the instrument to the interim substitute.
1A pointer to future work is a real part of the text
Reading an article and finding that the specifics are delegated is informative. The article sets a standard in words rather than numbers, so anyone quoting a threshold is quoting something other than the text.
This site records the pointer and the qualifier rather than filling the gap, because filling it would produce the most quotable and least supportable sentence on the page.
2Vendor robustness claims are the interim substitute
One vendor states its mark is designed to stand up to cropping, filters, frame-rate changes and lossy compression. That is a useful engineering claim and it is a claim by the party with the strongest interest in it holding.
It is recorded in its own row, attributed, with the page and date. What it is not is evidence about anyone else's marking, or about what would satisfy a code of practice.
3What changes when the codes arrive
The rows in this register that quote the article will stay as they are. What may change is the gap between them and what vendors publish, because a code would give both sides a shared vocabulary for a property each vendor currently describes in its own words.
Meanwhile, comparing two vendors' marking claims is comparing two pieces of prose written to different purposes, which this register does by quoting both rather than scoring them.
- Article 50(7)The Commission is to encourage codes of practice on detection, marking and labelling, and may adopt an implementing act if a code is inadequateprocedure in Article 98(2)
- Article 50(2)Technical solutions must be effective, interoperable, robust and reliable as far as technically feasiblequalifier on the marking duty
- SynthIDDesigned to stand up to cropping, filters, frame-rate changes and lossy compressionstated robustness
- recitals the Explorer links to Article 50Recitals 120, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136 and 137
4Sources
Article wording from AI Act Explorer, Article 50; vendor statements from the pages listed on each generator entry. Both read 2026-09-12. Related: Inside the file, Numbers without names, Where it is written.