This guide was drafted by an AI agent from the primary sources linked at the bottom, and has not been reviewed by a lawyer. It is general information, not legal advice. The original is at https://mdodeja.github.io/eu-ai-act-article-50-guide/guides/what-counts-as-a-deepfake-article-50.html.
Short answer. Under the EU AI Act a deep fake is AI-generated or manipulated image, audio or video that resembles real people, objects, places, entities or events and would falsely appear authentic. It is not limited to faces or to fakes made to deceive. A deployer who publishes one has to disclose that it is AI-made, clearly and at first exposure. Text is never a deep fake; it has its own rule.
The definition, in four tests
Article 3(60) of the EU AI Act defines a deep fake as "AI-generated or manipulated image, audio or video content that resembles existing persons, objects, places, entities or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful". Recital 134 uses the phrase "appreciably resembles".
Split into tests, a piece of content is a deep fake when all four hold:
- AI made or changed it. It was generated or manipulated by an AI system, not just shot and lightly retouched by hand.
- It is image, audio or video. Text is never a deep fake. AI text has its own rule in the second half of Article 50(4), covered in the guide on AI-written articles.
- It resembles something that exists. A real person, object, place, organisation or event. The definition is wider than faces.
- A viewer could take it for real. It "would falsely appear" authentic or truthful to a person seeing it.
The definition says nothing about intent. A harmless, well-meant ad can meet it. The question is how the content looks to the audience, not what the brand meant.
What the duty is
Article 50(4) says deployers of an AI system that generates or manipulates content constituting a deep fake "shall disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated". Article 50(5) adds that the information must be clear and distinguishable and given at the latest at the time of first exposure, and must meet accessibility requirements.
In marketing, the deployer is usually the brand or agency that uses the AI tool to make the asset and publishes it. The tool vendor has a separate duty under Article 50(2) to mark output in machine-readable form; that mark does not replace your visible disclosure.
There is one softer track. Where the content is part of an "evidently artistic, creative, satirical, fictional or analogous work or programme", the disclosure can be limited to saying such content exists, "in an appropriate manner that does not hamper the display or enjoyment of the work". Most ads are not evidently fictional works, so do not lean on this by default.
Worked examples
These are readings of the definition, not official classifications. The Act does not list examples, so treat borderline cases as covered.
| Content | Deep fake? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| A video ad with an AI avatar of a real, named spokesperson | Yes | AI-made video resembling an existing person, presented as them |
| A cloned voice of a real presenter reading a radio ad | Yes | AI audio resembling an existing person |
| A photorealistic AI "customer" giving a testimonial | Likely yes | Resembles a real person to the viewer and appears authentic; it may also break consumer law if presented as a real customer |
| AI photo of your real product in a kitchen it was never in | Likely yes | Resembles an existing object and appears to be a real photo |
| AI-generated photo of your real shop front or a real landmark | Likely yes | Resembles an existing place |
| AI-made "footage" of a launch event that did not happen as shown | Yes | Resembles an event and appears truthful |
| Obviously illustrated or cartoon-style artwork | Usually no | Would not falsely appear authentic |
| A clearly stylised 3D render of a concept product | Usually no | Not presented or likely taken as a real photo |
| Background removal, colour correction, light retouching | Usually no | Not substantial AI generation or manipulation of what is shown; keep it minor |
| AI-written ad copy or captions | No | Text is outside the deep-fake definition |
A grey area is the photorealistic AI person who does not exist. Such a person does not resemble a specific existing person, but the image still presents a "real" person in a real-looking scene, and it can resemble existing places or events. The Act does not settle this. If an audience would believe the image is a photograph, label it.
How to label the ones that qualify
- Images: a short line on or next to the image, such as "AI-generated image" or "Image created with AI". Not in alt text alone and not in a footnote page.
- Video: an on-screen label from the start, kept visible or repeated, plus a line in the caption or description.
- Audio: say it at the start, for example "This ad uses an AI-generated voice." In a podcast or radio slot, put it in the spoken part, not only in show notes.
- Social posts: use the platform's AI label where one exists and also say it in the caption. Platform labels differ and can be hidden in some views.
- Carousels and galleries: label each AI image, or label the set clearly at the start if all are AI-made.
The Commission's Code of Practice on transparency of AI-generated content includes common icons that deployers may use. Using the code is voluntary; the disclosure duty is not.
Beyond the AI Act
Article 50(6) keeps other laws in force. For marketing that matters in three places:
- Consumer protection. An AI "customer" or an edited product image that misleads buyers is a problem under EU consumer law whether or not it carries an AI label.
- Personality and image rights. Using a real person's face or voice needs their permission. A label does not fix a missing consent.
- Platform rules. Ad platforms and social networks have their own AI and synthetic-media policies, which change often.
Sources
- Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on EUR-Lex, the official text: Article 3(60), Article 50(4) to (6), Recital 134.
- Article 50 text, Article 3 definitions and Recital 134 at artificialintelligenceact.eu.
- European Commission: guidelines on transparency obligations for providers and deployers of AI systems, published 20 July 2026.
- European Commission: Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-generated Content.
