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 1628 primary-source items where technology appears as an affected industry, spanning 8+ 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 links to its primary government, regulator, or research source. AIGI does not paraphrase secondary commentary — our citation methodology is documented at /how-we-cite.

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 1628 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: 1628
Jurisdictions: 8
Last update: 1/20/2026

Most active jurisdictions for technology AI

Recent technology AI activity

BR enforcement action enforcement 1/20/2026

ANPD, MPF e Senacon recomendam que X impeça geração e circulação de conteúdos sexualizados indevidos por meio do Grok

Brazilian agencies ANPD, MPF, and Senacon issued recommendations to X (Twitter) to prevent and remove non-consensual sexualized synthetic content generated by its AI tool, Grok.

Authority: Autoridade Nacional de Proteção de Dados (Brazil)
CT enforcement action enforcement 12/23/2025

Attorney General William Tong Pushes Meta to Act on Misleading AI Weight Loss Ads

Connecticut AG William Tong and a bipartisan coalition of 35 attorneys general urge Meta to enforce policies against misleading AI weight loss ads, prohibit non-FDA approved drugs, and enhance AI content labeling.

Authority: Connecticut Attorney General
US policy paper 4/1/2026

[CFR] AI Is Facing a Crisis of Control—and the Industry Knows It

Advanced AI faces an accelerating crisis of control, posing severe security risks from dangerous capabilities and rogue behavior, with industry leaders warning of catastrophic consequences.

Authority: Council on Foreign Relations
US news analysis 4/1/2026

[CFR] AI Is Facing a Crisis of Control—and the Industry Knows It

The AI industry acknowledges a crisis of control due to AI's potential for misuse in developing weapons and its capacity for deception, urging urgent action despite government inaction.

Authority: Council on Foreign Relations
US policy paper 4/15/2026

[CFR] Six Reasons Claude Mythos Is an Inflection Point for AI—and Global Security

Anthropic's Claude Mythos AI model demonstrated an unprecedented ability to autonomously discover and exploit zero-day software vulnerabilities in secure infrastructure, raising significant global security concerns.

Authority: Council on Foreign Relations
IA legislation enacted

[IA Legislature] SF 2417

Iowa's SF 2417 establishes requirements for conversational AI services, mandating disclosures for minors and consumers, prohibiting harmful interactions, and providing civil penalties.

Authority: Iowa Legislature
TN legislation introduced

[TN Legislature] HB1951 (GA114): Criminal Offenses — As introduced, creates a new offense of coercive suicide; specifies that a person or entity commits the offense of coerc

Tennessee bill HB1951 proposes creating a criminal offense for persons or entities whose AI systems advise or encourage a person to commit or attempt to commit suicide.

Authority: Tennessee Legislature
TN legislation enacted

[TN Legislature] SB1580 (GA114): Health Care — As enacted, prohibits a person from developing or deploying an artificial intelligence system that advertises or represe

Tennessee law prohibits AI systems from advertising or acting as qualified mental health professionals.

Authority: Tennessee Legislature
BR agency report effective 4/8/2026

ANPD ganha nova estrutura e se consolida como agência reguladora

Brazil's ANPD gains new structure and regulatory agency status with expanded powers under Decree 12.881/2026 and Resolution 33, enhancing data protection and enforcement of the ECA Digital.

Authority: Autoridade Nacional de Proteção de Dados (Brazil)
NY legislation enacted 5/13/2025

[NY Legislature] S7882 (2025-2026): Relates to the use of algorithmic pricing by landlords for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant

New York bill S7882 prohibits residential landlords and software providers from using algorithmic pricing to facilitate anti-competitive agreements among rental property owners.

Authority: New York Legislature
NY legislation enacted 1/8/2026

[NY Legislature] S8828 (2025-2026): Relates to transparency and safety requirements for developers of artificial intelligence models

This New York bill S8828, signed by the Governor, establishes transparency and safety requirements for AI model developers and mandates the creation of an AI oversight office.

Authority: New York Legislature
IT guidance effective 4/21/2026

[Garante] COMUNICATO STAMPA - Tracking pixel nelle email: pubblicate le linee guida del Garante privacy. Più trasparenza e controllo per gli utenti: consenso obbligatorio e sei mesi agli operatori per l’adeguamento

Italy's privacy watchdog, Garante, issued guidelines mandating explicit consent for email tracking pixels and a six-month compliance period for operators.

Authority: Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

+ 1616 more — start trial for full access.

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 1628 primary-source items where technology appears as an affected industry, spanning 8+ 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 links to its primary government, regulator, or research source. AIGI does not paraphrase secondary commentary — our citation methodology is documented at /how-we-cite.

Stay informed

Daily briefs on technology AI compliance.

Start 14-day trial →

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.

Full disclosures →