Compliance laws

Built for the regulations that are already here

Deepfakes, voice-clone fraud, and synthetic disinformation have outpaced every tool built to catch them. Governments responded the only way that scales: by requiring provenance to live inside the media itself. Here’s what’s enforceable now, and what’s next.

The laws

Pick a law to see who it affects, what it requires, and the penalty.

In effect nowEnforceable or open for signature; existing EU systems by Dec 2
2027 → 2028Scope expands

SB 942

In effect · Aug 2, 2026

California AI Transparency Act · California, USA

Updated Oct 16, 2026: SB 1000 (Sep 30) removed the 1,000,000-user threshold and cut the licensee deadline to 72 hours.

GenAI providers must embed a hidden, permanent watermark in AI-generated image, audio, and video, and offer a free disclosure verification tool.

Who it affects

Anyone who produces a generative AI system that is publicly accessible in California. SB 1000 removed the 1,000,000-user threshold on Sep 30, 2026.

The requirement

A permanent latent (hidden) disclosure with five fields in every generated file, a free disclosure verification tool (your own or a compliant third party’s), and action within 72 hours when a licensee’s system stops complying.

Penalty

$5,000 per violation, and each day in violation counts as a separate, discrete violation.

EU AI Act

In effect · Aug 2, 2026

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 50 · European Union

Providers must mark AI-generated audio, image, video, and text in a machine-readable format; deepfakes and AI chat must be disclosed to users.

Who it affects

Providers and deployers of generative AI systems placed on or used within the EU market.

The requirement

Machine-readable marking of synthetic output that is effective, robust, and interoperable, plus disclosure for deepfakes and for any AI system that interacts directly with people.

Penalty

Up to €15,000,000 or 3% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher (Art. 99).

India IT Rules

In effect · Feb 20, 2026

IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Amendment Rules, 2026 · India

Synthetically generated content on social platforms must be clearly and prominently labelled, with provenance metadata preserved.

Who it affects

Social media intermediaries and the users who post AI-generated or modified content.

The requirement

Synthetically generated information must be clearly and prominently labelled; platforms must preserve provenance metadata and remove the most harmful deepfakes within as little as two hours.

Penalty

Non-compliance puts the platform’s Section 79 safe-harbour protection at risk.

Code of Practice

Open for signature · Jun 10, 2026

Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-generated Content · European Union

The voluntary EU Code that defines how Article 50(2) marking is actually assessed. It expects at least two layers of machine-readable marking.

Who it affects

Providers and deployers of generative AI who want a presumption of good-faith compliance with Article 50.

The requirement

Section 1 covers provider-side marking and detection (signed metadata + imperceptible watermark); Section 2 covers deployer-side labelling. Verda ships both layers in one call.

Penalty

Not signing means carrying the burden of proving adequacy yourself, assessed individually by each market surveillance authority.

AB 853

Phasing in · 2027 → 2028

California AI Transparency Act (expansion) · California, USA

Updated Oct 16, 2026: AB 2713 (Sep 30) revised the platform duties; a third-party viewer is allowed.

Extends the AI Transparency Act beyond model makers: onto large online platforms, then onto capture devices like cameras and phones.

Who it affects

Large online platforms and manufacturers of capture devices (cameras, phones, voice recorders).

The requirement

From Jan 1, 2027, large online platforms must surface content provenance to users. From Jan 1, 2028, capture devices sold in California must offer a latent disclosure of the device and capture time.

Penalty

Enforced under the AI Transparency Act’s civil-penalty regime ($5,000 per violation).

Who this affects

Most teams don’t yet realize these mandates already apply to them.

Build and serve AI models

Video model providersImage model providersAudio/voice model providersMusic generation providersMultimodal model providers

Serve AI-generated media through their product

Marketing content generatorsAI avatar & virtual human platformsAI presentation & slide toolsSocial media content toolsAI photo editing platforms

Voice agents and realtime AI voice

AI call center & customer serviceAI sales & dialer platformsConversational voice AI platformsAI dubbing & localizationAI podcast & audiobook narration

The EU’s Article 50 Guidelines name voice cloners explicitly: any system generating synthetic audio is in scope, not just foundation models.

Edit or transform existing media using AI

AI audio editing & regenerationAI video face/voice swapAI post-production toolsSpeech-to-speech translationAI upscaling & restoration

Are you exempt?

Article 50(2) doesn’t catch everything. The marking duty may not apply where:

Assistive standard editing

The system performs only an assistive function for standard editing and doesn’t substantially alter the input or its semantics, e.g. upscaling, restoration, minor retouching.

No substantial alteration

The output doesn’t materially change the input data or its meaning.

Narrow B2B / industrial use

A limited carve-out with three cumulative conditions. Public and consumer-facing systems are excluded.

Real-time ephemeral content

Games and VR, only where marking is not technically feasible and session-level disclosure is given.

Source-code outputs

Generated source code is outside the marking obligation.

What SB 942 requires

A new era of AI regulations, stay ahead with Verda

SB 942 mandates that AI-generated images, audios, and videos must include watermarking that is:

Persistent

Survives sharing, editing, and re-encoding

Detectable

Verifiable by platforms, regulators, and users

Difficult to remove

Resilient to manipulation

Publicly detectable

Through a free public tool and API, with standards-compatible provenance

Five fields, not an "AI or not" bit

SB 942, as amended by SB 1000, enumerates five fields the latent disclosure must carry, and a durability-only watermark can’t hold them.

SB 942 requires in the latent disclosureVerda field
Name of the covered provider→Registered owner
Name and version of the GenAI system→Integration + version
Time and date of creation or alteration→Timestamp
Unique identifier→UID
Whether the system created or altered the content→Record metadata

Embedded directly or resolvable via a permanent link. A watermark that only signals "AI-generated" cannot carry these fields. Updated 16 October 2026: SB 1000, in force since 30 September 2026, added the fifth field and cut the licensee deadline to 72 hours.

72-hour rule

Built for enforcement

Since SB 1000, a covered provider has 72 hours from discovering a noncompliant licensee to end the licence or notify the licensee. Because every Verda mark is independently detectable, licensee output can be checked for the mark at any time.

Enterprise solution

Not sure what the law requires of you?

Beyond the API, our team maps your product to SB 942, the EU AI Act, and what’s coming next, then shows you exactly what to implement. Full-fledged compliance consulting, included.

Book a free consult

The internet will have an authentication layer

SB 942 has been enforceable since August 2.

bd@verda.ai