FAQ on AI image labelling

Article 50 of the AI Act has applied since 2 August 2026 (Article 113), with no transition period for deployers such as retailers. Only providers of AI systems placed on the market before that date have until 2 December 2026 for machine-readable marking (Article 111(4)). More under deadlines.

Yes, if the image is a deep fake, meaning it resembles real or plausibly existing persons, objects, places or events and would falsely appear authentic (Article 3(60), Article 50(4) AI Act); according to the guidelines this explicitly includes consumer goods (para. 113). Typical cases are photorealistic AI models and images that show the product differently from reality. The labelling check tells you whether your image is one.

No, deep fakes last generated or modified with AI before that date do not need to be labelled retroactively, although the guidelines encourage it (para. 154). If you edit an old image with AI again later, the new date applies.

Under the guidelines, standard editing such as cropping, colour and brightness correction, sharpening, background removal or edge completion generally does not turn an image into a deep fake (para. 92), and neither do minor changes such as removing a passer-by (para. 116). If the product then looks different from reality, the exemption does not apply. See what a deep fake is.

Generally not under the guidelines, if the product is real and unchanged and the background is purely aesthetic (para. 116). If the background shows a scene of use that says something about the product's size, effect or place of use, labelling is required or at least recommended.

Yes, if it is photorealistic. An AI-generated person who looks real is a deep fake under the guidelines (para. 113, examples after para. 116); clearly drawn or stylised figures are not. If you use AI to change the face or body of a real person, you generally also need their consent; the label does not replace it (para. 124).

Generally not to you. Anyone who merely passes on third-party AI images is not a deployer under the guidelines (paras. 14, 16), though the guidelines recommend keeping existing labels and informing customers (paras. 16, 17). If you decided on the use of AI yourself, for example when briefing an agency, you are a deployer (paras. 12, 14).

Yes, if the AI image is used in the EU, for example in a store that sells to customers in the EU (Article 2(1)(c) AI Act, guidelines para. 13). Only content that reaches the EU through unforeseeable channels outside the retailer's control is excluded.

Generally not. Article 50(4) only covers texts that inform the public on matters of public interest; under the guidelines, product descriptions and advertising copy are not included, except for claims about health, consumer safety or sustainability, for example (para. 131).

No. The disclosure must be clear and distinguishable and given at the latest at first exposure (Article 50(5)); a note that is easily overlooked, for example in terms of use or hidden in menus, is not enough (guidelines para. 142). A general sentence like “We use AI images” does not replace the label on the image either.

No. The label belongs on the AI image itself, wherever it appears. First exposure is often the product card in a collection or search, where only one image is visible, and every person browses the gallery differently (guidelines para. 143).

The Code of Practice uses “AI” as the main element, visible without a click or hover, in a place free of overlapping elements, for example the top right corner. The label needs its own background with enough contrast and must be accessible (Article 50(5)). Details under label design, ready-made labels in the label tool.

No. The Commission provides the icons “AI”, “AI GENERATED” and “AI MODIFIED” for free, using them is optional and an equivalent label of your own is allowed. What is mandatory is the labelling itself; more under EU icons.

The Code of Practice requires “AI” as the main element; replacing it would depart from the Code. You can add text in your customers' language next to it, for example “AI-generated” or, for German-speaking customers, “KI-generiert”.

Say what was made with AI, for example “Background generated with AI, product unchanged”; this fits into the label's second layer. Vague words such as “AI-enhanced” or “illustrative image” do not clearly disclose the AI origin. The disclosure text generator makes suggestions.

No. Deployers cannot rely on the provider's machine-readable marking because people cannot see it (guidelines para. 117); metadata is evidence of AI use but does not replace the visible label. You can check it with the metadata checker.

The AI Act does not require it from retailers; machine-readable marking is the providers' job (Article 50(2)). Google Merchant Center, however, requires the IPTC field in the file for AI-generated product images. The IPTC tool writes it in your browser.

A label in your store only works in your store. In feeds, ads and on marketplaces you label yourself, for example with a version of the image that has the label burned in, and platform rules apply as well, such as the IPTC field at Google. Overview under platforms.

With the free widget, which uses one line of code to label every image you have marked by attribute, file name or alt text. Guides for each system are under integrations; for Shopify there is a dedicated app.

The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency), which under the KI-MIG act, in force since 29 July 2026, is the market surveillance authority and central complaints office (§§ 2, 8 KI-MIG). Complaints can be filed free of charge via an online form. More under fines and enforcement.

Infringements of Article 50 can be fined up to EUR 15 million or 3 % of worldwide annual turnover (Article 99(4) AI Act); for SMEs the lower amount applies (paragraph 6), so with a turnover of EUR 2 million the ceiling is EUR 60,000. The actual amount depends on the case, for example on severity, duration and cooperation with the authority (paragraph 7).

In Germany, probably yes, but courts have not decided it. There are good arguments that Article 50(4) is a market conduct rule under § 3a of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG). Competitors cannot claim their costs for breaches of labelling obligations in e-commerce (§ 13(4) no. 1 UWG), associations can.

No, as long as they use AI purely privately (Article 2(10) AI Act). Anyone who sells regularly or earns money from it acts professionally (guidelines para. 19), so a store is never private use.

No. The labelling check asks the questions from the Commission's guidelines and cites the paragraph behind every result; the decision is yours, and it is not legal advice. The guidelines are not binding; only the Court of Justice of the EU can interpret the law bindingly (para. 5).