Are AI translations covered by the EU AI Act's marking duty?

The final guidelines list AI translations among assistive-editing exclusions from Article 50(2) — translating human-written content without substantially altering it needs no machine-readable mark.

Is AI-generated source code in scope of Article 50(2)?

The final guidelines' expanded exclusion examples include source code, alongside short outputs like single words, captions and labels, and machine-to-machine interim outputs in closed workflows.

If a system is excluded from marking, is it excluded from all of Article 50?

No — the duties run separately. An interactive system still needs 50(1) disclosure, and published public-interest text is assessed under 50(4) on its own terms.

Kilde › Guides › AI Act Art 50 › What Article 50 does not cover: the as…

What Article 50 does not cover: the assistive-editing exclusions, itemised

Current to 26 August 2026 · updates land in the changelog.

Not every AI output needs a mark. Article 50(2) excludes systems performing an assistive or standard-editing function that does not substantially alter the input content or its meaning — and the final guidelines (20 July 2026) turned that clause into a usable list.

The guidelines' own examples

Grammar and spell-checking — the canonical assistive case.
Format conversion and minor cropping — transformation without substantive alteration.
AI translations — expanded in the final text: translating human-written content is assistive, not generation.
Source code — AI-generated code sits outside the marking duty's examples of concern.
Short outputs — single words, captions, labels.
Machine-to-machine and interim outputs in closed workflows — content no human consumes as content.

The organising principle: the duty aims at content a person could mistake for authentic human material — not at tooling that polishes, converts or connects.

Where the boundary snaps back

Each exclusion has a cliff. Translation that rewrites — changing meaning, adding content — stops being assistive. Short outputs assembled into long ones become generation. And none of this touches the other duties: an excluded-from-marking system can still be an interactive system under 50(1), and published text can still trigger 50(4) on its own terms. Run the four duties separately; exclusion from one is not exclusion from all.

Document the call

The practical artifact is a one-page scope memo per system: which duty was assessed, which exclusion applies, why the alteration is not substantial. Cheap to write now, valuable the day a regulator or enterprise customer asks why your outputs carry no marks.

Related guides

Quick answers

Are AI translations covered by the EU AI Act's marking duty?: The final guidelines list AI translations among assistive-editing exclusions from Article 50(2) — translating human-written content without substantially altering it needs no machine-readable mark.
Is AI-generated source code in scope of Article 50(2)?: The final guidelines' expanded exclusion examples include source code, alongside short outputs like single words, captions and labels, and machine-to-machine interim outputs in closed workflows.
If a system is excluded from marking, is it excluded from all of Article 50?: No — the duties run separately. An interactive system still needs 50(1) disclosure, and published public-interest text is assessed under 50(4) on its own terms.

Ship the disclosures before enforcement finds the gap.

The AI Act Article 50 Kit: the disclosure copy library (English + 中文), the marking implementation guide with survival-test protocol, deepfake and text-labeling walkthroughs, obviousness and scope memos, the evidence log, the Code of Practice accession path — built from the regulation and the final guidelines, with pinpoint citations.

Get the kit — US$190 Free 4-page sample (PDF)

Instant download · 14-day unconditional refund · single-organisation licence · full product page

General information only — not legal advice, and no clearance opinions. Sources are Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Articles 50 and 99), Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, the Commission's final Article 50 guidelines of 20 July 2026 (non-binding) and our audited kit research. Marking-technology status changes fast: treat vendor announcements as live only once verified. © 2026 Kilde.

Built by Kilde's founder, a practising attorney admitted to a US state bar (not an EU or Hong Kong admission). About · Verification log · Refunds · Terms · Privacy · esau@trykilde.com