Skip to main content

What it does not do

The package writes a machine-readable marking in a standard vocabulary and renders a notice in words you can change. It does not decide whether that meets an obligation of yours, and nothing in it should be read as saying so. Which obligation applies depends on your role and on the content:

  • Article 50(2) of the AI Act binds the provider of a system that generates content. The Commission's guidelines allow a provider to rely on a marking that the provider of the model already applies.
  • Article 50(4) binds the deployer, and for text it covers text published to inform the public on matters of public interest. The Commission's guidelines name product descriptions and advertising text as outside it, unless they make claims about health, safety or sustainability.

The Commission's guidelines on the transparency obligations are the document to read for your case, together with the Commission's Code of Practice on transparency, which describes the marking techniques below.

The gap report measures outputs against that Code in the terms it uses, and it decides nothing a reader of the Code has to judge: whether an output is an exception, whether the register is right about a model, and whether a gap is acceptable stay with you.

It does not sign or watermark​

The microdata the package writes is plain markup. It is not signed, and nothing stops a copy of the text from leaving it behind. For text, the Code of Practice describes metadata that is digitally signed and time-stamped, watermarks embedded in the text, and logging, and it treats free-form text on a web page as text that cannot carry metadata. The package provides none of these techniques. It carries the marking to the place where you deliver the text and writes it there in a form a tool can read.

For mail, the header field is signed only where your DKIM signature lists it, and the package signs nothing itself. MailMarkingReader reports which signatures list the field and verifies none of them.

For images the same holds as for text. The XMP the package writes is plain metadata, not signed, and a tool that strips metadata removes it. The package writes no C2PA manifest of its own. It recognizes a manifest an image carries, without verifying the manifest's signature, and it does not copy a manifest onto a conversion, which gets an XMP marking of the source type the manifest names instead.

It decides nothing about wording or placement​

The words of the notice are a default you can publish and change, and the notice appears where your page puts it. The package does not choose a position on the page, and it shows no notice by itself.

It does not implement proposals that are not standards​

Two further ways of marking text exist as proposals. The package implements neither:

  • an AI-Disclosure HTTP response header, described in an individual Internet-Draft that expired in August 2026 without being adopted by a working group;
  • an ai-disclosure HTML attribute, described in a report of a W3C Community Group, which is not part of the HTML standard.

The vocabulary the package writes, IPTC Digital Source Type in schema.org microdata, is published and maintained by both organizations.

The header field the package writes into a mail, Digital-Source-Type, is the package's own, because no standard names a field for this. Its value is a term of the same IPTC vocabulary, so a tool that knows the vocabulary can read it.