Who at a technology company should track these rules?

General Counsel, Chief AI Officer, or VP Compliance at a tech company is typically the role accountable for technology-AI compliance. AIGI is designed to put primary-source updates in front of this role daily.

How many technology AI items does AIGI track?

AIGI currently tracks 10 primary-source items where technology appears as an affected industry, spanning 1+ jurisdictions. The corpus is updated continuously.

Which jurisdictions are most active on technology AI?

Activity varies by sub-sector. AIGI's coverage map shows per-jurisdiction depth, and each item links to its primary authority source. See /coverage for the live distribution.

Where do AIGI's technology citations come from?

Every item on this page includes a direct link to the relevant government, regulator, or research document.

Industry · Foundation-model rules, platform liability, and AI-product obligations

AI Compliance for Technology

Technology-industry AI rules touch foundation-model obligations under the EU AI Act, platform liability for AI-generated content, AI-product safety standards, training-data rights, and obligations for general-purpose AI providers. AIGI tracks every primary-source AI rule affecting AI labs, cloud providers, model developers, and platform companies. As of the most recent update, AIGI tracks 10 primary-source items affecting technology.

Who tracks this?

Typically: General Counsel, Chief AI Officer, or VP Compliance at a tech company. AIGI is built to put primary-source AI updates affecting technology in front of this role daily — with citation chains, status timelines, and obligation mapping.

Coverage at a glance

Items tracked: 10
Jurisdictions: 1
Last update: 12/6/2024

Most active jurisdictions for technology AI

US 10

Recent technology AI activity

US enforcement action proposed rule 12/6/2024

[FTC] IntelliVision Technologies Corp.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed an IntelliVision facial-recognition settlement addressing unsupported accuracy, bias, and anti-spoofing claims.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US enforcement action comment period 1/6/2025

[FTC] accessiBe; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed a consent order addressing deceptive claims about accessiBe's automated accessibility software.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US enforcement action proposed rule 10/3/2024

[FTC] Rytr LLC; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed a consent order restricting Rytr's AI-generated review and testimonial services, subject to final approval.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US enforcement action comment period 9/30/2024

[FTC] DoNotPay, Inc..; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed a consent order addressing allegedly deceptive marketing of DoNotPay's AI legal service.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US enforcement action comment period 5/2/2025

[FTC] Workado, LLC, f/k/a Content at Scale AI; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed a consent order addressing unsupported accuracy claims for Workado's AI-content detector.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US enforcement action comment period 1/25/2021

[FTC] Everalbum, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

FTC proposed an Everalbum order addressing alleged deceptive facial-recognition and biometric-data practices.

Authority: Federal Trade Commission
US original research 2/19/2026

New Report: Expanding the AI Evaluation Toolbox with Statistical Models

NIST research evaluates statistical methods for estimating uncertainty and generalized accuracy in LLM benchmark results.
US policy paper 9/29/2026

[NIST IT] Comments on Software and Agentic AI Identity Concept Paper

NIST summarizes 600+ comments supporting standards-based identity, authorization, and governance for AI agents.

Authority: NIST Computer Security Resource Center
US "government policy" 5/12/2026

[NIST IT] NIST NCCoE Cyber AI Profile Virtual Working Session Series: Usability of the Profile

NIST NCCoE consultation material proposes Cyber AI Profile formats and records unresolved scope, adoption, and delivery questions.

Authority: NIST Computer Security Resource Center
US policy paper 5/5/2026

[NIST IT] NIST NCCoE Cyber AI Profile Virtual Working Session Series: Extending the Technical Content

NIST discusses proposed ways to extend its Cyber AI Profile for agentic AI and Zero Trust; the material is preliminary and nonbinding.

Authority: NIST Computer Security Resource Center

Frequently asked questions

Which AI laws apply to technology?: Technology-industry AI rules touch foundation-model obligations under the EU AI Act, platform liability for AI-generated content, AI-product safety standards, training-data rights, and obligations for general-purpose AI providers. AIGI tracks every primary-source AI rule affecting AI labs, cloud providers, model developers, and platform companies.
Who at a technology company should track these rules?: General Counsel, Chief AI Officer, or VP Compliance at a tech company is typically the role accountable for technology-AI compliance. AIGI is designed to put primary-source updates in front of this role daily.
How many technology AI items does AIGI track?: AIGI currently tracks 10 primary-source items where technology appears as an affected industry, spanning 1+ jurisdictions. The corpus is updated continuously.
Which jurisdictions are most active on technology AI?: Activity varies by sub-sector. AIGI's coverage map shows per-jurisdiction depth, and each item links to its primary authority source. See /coverage for the live distribution.
Where do AIGI's technology citations come from?: Every item on this page includes a direct link to the relevant government, regulator, or research document.

Regulatory intelligence

Track AI-governance change affecting technology teams.

AIGI monitors cited regulatory change and delivers decision-ready analysis. It does not monitor customer AI systems or enforce policy.

Start a 14-day trial Explore the tracker

Important — about this brief

This brief is published by AIGI as a regulatory intelligence service. It contains general information about AI laws, regulations, enforcement actions, and policy signals across jurisdictions. It is not legal, compliance, audit, or risk-management advice; it does not establish an attorney-client, advisory, or fiduciary relationship; and it should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional counsel applied to specific facts and circumstances. Where the brief identifies “Issues for Review,” those are observations of questions a reader in a particular role might raise with their own legal, compliance, or risk function — not recommendations to act. AIGI expressly disclaims liability for actions taken or not taken in reliance on this brief. Subscribers in regulated industries should consult licensed professionals authorized to practice in their jurisdiction.

Terms and disclosures →