--- title: "France — Global AI Monitor" canonical: https://artificial-intelligence.gi/jurisdictions/france/ source_html: /jurisdictions/france/index.html description: "France AI governance record: 5 instruments, 0 obligations and 41 evidenced claims across 12 modules. Research as of 11 Nov 2026." generated_at: 2026-11-12T17:20:02Z content_sha256: a5d605cf1ed906768f8fdfb4674e0d26b07b14a44607f4522b0060413cc50995 generator: "fe-fleet/md-twin@1.0" --- # France AI Regulation & Governance 11 active modules 1 quiet Last updated 11 Nov 2026 · 12 modules · 5 instruments · 41 claims · 46 sources in the cumulative register Download report (PDF) Collapse all Framework status Digital Omnibus on AI (Valid from 2026-07-27). Main regulator Regulator [No single national AI authority. Designation is distributed across ~15 sectoral regulators, coordinated by DGE/DGCCRF, with CNIL as lead for high-risk AI; designation carried in the DDADUE bill (Senate, Feb 2026)](https://www.entreprises.gouv.fr/espace-presse/la-dge-et-la-dgccrf-publient-le-projet-de-designation-des-autorites-nationales-en) Next milestone 2 Dec 2026 : New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply ([01 AI Framework Law](#sec-mod-ai_framework_law)) Record status Live · Periodic active record · 46 sources (37 retrieved) · 16 under review · Not yet expert-reviewed ✦ AI-assembled from cited sources Evidence-gated · [How we verify](/methodology/#ai-content-disclosure) · Disclosure Not yet expert-reviewed · Not legal, compliance or investment advice. Facts are machine-assembled from cited public sources. Individual claims have not each been independently verified by a human reviewer. See [methodology](/methodology/). Source tiers: T1 enacted statute, regulation, or binding supervisory order · T2 official regulator guidance, consultation, or registry · T3 international standard-setter or peer-reviewed analysis · T4 practitioner commentary or secondary reporting. Confidence: high = corroborated by retrieved T1/T2 text · medium = single official source or secondary corroboration · low = preliminary or unverified. [Full definitions →](/methodology/#source-tiers) Research checked 11 Nov 2026 · Updated 11 Nov 2026 Record history Research as of 11 Nov 2026 · Record last changed 11 Nov 2026 · Published 11 Nov 2026 · Page built 12 Nov 2026 5 Instruments 5 Current instruments 1 Binding, in force +4 more binding, in-force date not recorded 0 Obligations 41 Claims 5 Upcoming milestones 46 Sources ## Next milestones in this record - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply Scheduled · [01 AI Framework Law](#sec-mod-ai_framework_law) - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply Scheduled · [03 High-Risk Systems](#sec-mod-high_risk_systems) - 2 Dec 2026Generative AI legacy-system marking grace period ends Scheduled · [05 Transparency & Synthetic Content](#sec-mod-transparency_and_synthetic_content) - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply Scheduled · [11 Sandboxes & Transitional Relief](#sec-mod-sandboxes_and_transitional_relief) - 2 Aug 2027National AI regulatory sandbox deadline Scheduled · [01 AI Framework Law](#sec-mod-ai_framework_law) Jump to module (12) ### 01AI Framework LawActive Derived: Probable▾# Digital Omnibus on AI (Valid from 2026-07-27). 1 instrument (1 current) · 0 obligations · 8 claims · 4 milestones · Next: 2 Dec 2026 (New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply) France's AI governance rests on two directly-effective EU regulations: the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) and the Digital Omnibus on AI (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744). The AI Act entered into force on 1 August 2024, with a staged commencement: prohibited practices under Article 5 applicable from 2 February 2025, and general-purpose AI model and governance-chapter obligations applicable from 2 August 2025; the remaining AI Act provisions were originally scheduled to apply from 2 August 2026. The Digital Omnibus on AI, in force since 27 July 2026, amended that commencement schedule under Article 113: the application date for Article 6(2)/Annex III (stand-alone) high-risk AI systems is now 2 December 2027, and the application date for Article 6(1)/Annex I (product-embedded) high-risk AI systems is now 2 August 2028; Article 50 transparency duties were left unaffected by the deferral. The core AI Act Chapter III Sections 1-3 high-risk-system obligations now apply from those same dates rather than from the Act's original 2 August 2026 commencement. The Digital Omnibus also moved back the Article 57 deadline for Member States to have at least one operational national AI regulatory sandbox, from 2 August 2026 to 2 August 2027. France has not enacted the statute designating its AI Act national competent authorities, a step now more than a year past the Regulation's original deadline. As of 22 October 2026, no French authority has been legally designated under AI Act Article 28 or Article 70; the envisaged DGCCRF/CNIL/ACPR/Arcom designation scheme remains in the pending DDADUE bill rather than in force. Instruments (1) - Digital Omnibus on AI Valid from 2026-07-27Binding Milestones - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2027National AI regulatory sandbox deadline UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Dec 2027Annex III high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2028Annex I high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI Claims and evidence (8) - The AI Act's commencement is staged: it entered into force 1 August 2024, with prohibited practices from 2 February 2025, GPAI obligations from 2 August 2025, and the remainder from 2 August 2026 as originally drafted.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[BetterRegulation / Qorus](https://service.betterregulation.com/document/742329) T3 · RetrievedThis Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and shall apply from 2 August 2026. - Derived: Probable The Digital Omnibus on AI, in force from 27 July 2026, pushed back the AI Act's high-risk application dates to 2 December 2027 (Annex III) and 2 August 2028 (Annex I), leaving Art 50 transparency duties unaffected.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Official Journal of the European Union](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 24 Jul 2026REGULATION (EU) 2026/1744 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 July 2026 - Derived: Probable As of 22 October 2026, no French authority has been legally designated under AI Act Arts 28 or 70, leaving the DGCCRF/CNIL/ACPR/Arcom designation scheme in the pending DDADUE bill rather than in force.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - The AI Act entered into force on 1 August 2024 and applies in full from 2 August 2026, with earlier staggered application of prohibited-practices provisions from 2 February 2025 and GPAI/governance chapters from 2 August 2025.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[BetterRegulation / Qorus](https://service.betterregulation.com/document/742329) T3 · RetrievedThis Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and shall apply from 2 August 2026. - France has not yet enacted the statute designating its AI Act national competent authorities, over a year past the Regulation's deadline.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - The Digital Omnibus on AI deferred the Annex III high-risk application date to 2 December 2027 and the Annex I date to 2 August 2028, while leaving Art.50 transparency duties unaffected.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Official Journal of the European Union](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 24 Jul 2026REGULATION (EU) 2026/1744 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 July 2026 - Member States must have at least one operational national AI regulatory sandbox by 2 August 2027, a date moved back from 2 August 2026.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 27 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[LegalToCode](https://legaltocode.com/en/ai-act/cl-57/) T3 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art 57(1)The deadline for an operational regulatory sandbox moved from 2 August 2026 to 2 August 2027. - The core high-risk-system obligations in AI Act Chapter III Sections 1-3 now apply from 2 December 2027 for Article 6(2)/Annex III systems and from 2 August 2028 for Article 6(1)/Annex I embedded systems, rather than from the AI Act's original 2 August 2026 date.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Publications Office of the European Union / EUR-Lex](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art 113, third para., points (c)(i)-(ii) and (d)it is appropriate that the date of application of Sections 1, 2 and 3 of Chapter III is set to 2 December 2027 for AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III ### 02Prohibited PracticesActive Derived: Probable▾# The Digital Omnibus adds two new prohibited AI practices under Article 5 - non-consensual intimate-image generation and CSAM generation - applicable from 2 December 2026, alongside the eight practices prohibited since 2 February 2025. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 3 claims · 0 milestones Eight categories of AI practice have been prohibited under Article 5 of the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) since 2 February 2025, directly effective in France. Breach of these Article 5 prohibitions carries fines of up to EUR 35 million or 7% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher. The Digital Omnibus on AI (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744) adds two further prohibited practices under Article 5 — non-consensual intimate-image generation and generation of child sexual abuse material — applicable from 2 December 2026, extending the existing list of eight practices prohibited since 2 February 2025. Cited evidence in this module rests solely on tier 3/4 commentary despite primary official sources existing for this jurisdiction. Claims and evidence (3) - Derived: Probable The Digital Omnibus adds two new prohibited AI practices under Article 5 - non-consensual intimate-image generation and CSAM generation - applicable from 2 December 2026, alongside the eight practices prohibited since 2 February 2025.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 1 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[simpleact.eu](https://simpleact.eu/ai-act-prohibited-practices) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 1 Oct 2026Two new prohibitions on non-consensual intimate depictions and child sexual abuse material (Art. - Eight AI practices are prohibited under Art.5 since 2 February 2025, with two further prohibitions (intimate-image and CSAM generation) applying from 2 December 2026.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 1 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[simpleact.eu](https://simpleact.eu/ai-act-prohibited-practices) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 1 Oct 2026Two new prohibitions on non-consensual intimate depictions and child sexual abuse material (Art. - Breach of the AI Act's Art.5 prohibitions carries fines of up to EUR 35 million or 7% of global turnover, whichever is higher.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[euaiact.com](https://www.euaiact.com/blog/eu-ai-act-penalties-enforcement) T3 · Retrieved€35 million or 7% of total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. ### 03High-Risk SystemsActive Derived: Probable▾# Digital Omnibus on AI (Valid from 2026-07-27). 1 instrument (1 current) · 0 obligations · 7 claims · 4 milestones · Next: 2 Dec 2026 (New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply) Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 (the Digital Omnibus on AI), in force in France since 27 July 2026, deferred the AI Act's high-risk application dates under Article 113: application for Article 6(2)/Annex III stand-alone high-risk AI systems moved from 2 August 2026 to 2 December 2027, and application for Article 6(1)/Annex I product-embedded high-risk AI systems moved to 2 August 2028. The core high-risk-system obligations in AI Act Chapter III, Sections 1 to 3, now apply from those dates rather than from the Act's original 2 August 2026 commencement. Annex III of the AI Act sets out eight use-case areas that render a system high-risk, including biometrics, critical infrastructure, employment, and essential public and private services. From their respective application dates, providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the system's lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and must ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output. Deployer duties under AI Act Article 26, including the fundamental rights impact assessment required under Article 27, begin on 2 December 2027 for Annex III high-risk systems. Instruments (1) - Digital Omnibus on AI Valid from 2026-07-27Binding Milestones - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2027National AI regulatory sandbox deadline UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Dec 2027Annex III high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2028Annex I high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI Claims and evidence (7) - Derived: Probable The Digital Omnibus on AI, in force from 27 July 2026, pushed back the AI Act's high-risk application dates to 2 December 2027 (Annex III) and 2 August 2028 (Annex I), leaving Art 50 transparency duties unaffected.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Official Journal of the European Union](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 24 Jul 2026REGULATION (EU) 2026/1744 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 July 2026 - Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 (the Digital Omnibus on AI), in force from 27 July 2026, deferred the AI Act's high-risk application dates under Article 113 to 2 December 2027 for Annex III systems and 2 August 2028 for Annex I systems.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T1) · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Official Journal of the European Union](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 24 Jul 2026REGULATION (EU) 2026/1744 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 July 2026 - [euaiact.com](https://www.euaiact.com/digital-omnibus-ai) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The high-risk obligations moved: Annex III use cases from 2 August 2026 to 2 December 2027, and Annex I product-safety systems from 2 August 2027 to 2 August 2028. - Annex III of the AI Act lists eight use-case areas that make an AI system high-risk, including biometrics, critical infrastructure, employment and essential public/private services.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[legalithm.com](https://www.legalithm.com/en/ai-act-guide/annex-iii-high-risk-areas) T3 · Retrievedbiometrics, critical infrastructure, education and vocational training, employment and worker management, essential private and public services, law enforcement, migration and border control, and administration of justice and democratic processes. - Derived: Probable Deployer duties under Article 26 of the AI Act, including the fundamental rights impact assessment under Article 27, start on 2 December 2027 for Annex III high-risk systems.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[govern365.ai](https://govern365.ai/blogs/eu-ai-act-digital-omnibus-timeline/) T3 · RetrievedDeployer duties under Article 26 and the fundamental rights impact assessment under Article 27 therefore also start on 2 December 2027 for Annex III systems. - Derived: Probable Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[EASA (AI Office, DG CNECT)](https://www.easa.europa.eu/ro/downloads/140097/en) T1 · RetrievedRisk management system to minimise risks for deployers and affected persons - The Digital Omnibus on AI deferred the Annex III high-risk application date to 2 December 2027 and the Annex I date to 2 August 2028, while leaving Art.50 transparency duties unaffected.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Official Journal of the European Union](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 24 Jul 2026REGULATION (EU) 2026/1744 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 July 2026 - The core high-risk-system obligations in AI Act Chapter III Sections 1-3 now apply from 2 December 2027 for Article 6(2)/Annex III systems and from 2 August 2028 for Article 6(1)/Annex I embedded systems, rather than from the AI Act's original 2 August 2026 date.Confidence: Probable · As of 24 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Publications Office of the European Union / EUR-Lex](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601744) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art 113, third para., points (c)(i)-(ii) and (d)it is appropriate that the date of application of Sections 1, 2 and 3 of Chapter III is set to 2 December 2027 for AI systems classified as high-risk pursuant to Article 6(2) and Annex III ### 04General-Purpose AIActive▾# GPAI model providers have, since 2 August 2025, been required under AI Act Art 53 to maintain technical documentation, provide it downstream, implement a copyright policy and publish a training-data summary. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 3 claims · 0 milestones Since 2 August 2025, providers of general-purpose AI models have been required under Article 53 of the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) to maintain technical documentation, provide that documentation to downstream providers, implement a copyright-compliance policy, and publish a summary of the training data used. A general-purpose AI model is presumed to pose systemic risk where its cumulative training compute exceeds 10^25 floating-point operations, triggering the additional obligations under AI Act Article 55. Claims and evidence (3) - GPAI model providers have, since 2 August 2025, been required under AI Act Art 53 to maintain technical documentation, provide it downstream, implement a copyright policy and publish a training-data summary.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[aiact.zalize.com](https://aiact.zalize.com/guides/gpai-obligations/) T3 · RetrievedThe GPAI chapter (Articles 53–55) has applied since 2 August 2025. - Providers of general-purpose AI models in scope from 2 August 2025 must maintain technical documentation, provide it to downstream providers, maintain a copyright-compliance policy, and publish a training-data summary.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[aiact.zalize.com](https://aiact.zalize.com/guides/gpai-obligations/) T3 · RetrievedThe GPAI chapter (Articles 53–55) has applied since 2 August 2025. - A GPAI model is presumed to pose systemic risk when cumulative training compute exceeds 10^25 FLOPs, triggering additional Art.55 obligations.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[European Commission](https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/general-purpose-ai-models-ai-act-questions-answers) T1 · Retrievedthe AI Act lays down a threshold of 10^25 floating-point operations (FLOP) used for training the model (Article 51(1)(a) and (2) AI Act) ### 05Transparency & Synthetic ContentActive Derived: Probable▾# AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) (Applies since 2026-08-02). 2 instruments (2 current) · 0 obligations · 5 claims · 1 milestone · Next: 2 Dec 2026 (Generative AI legacy-system marking grace period ends) France's SREN law (Loi n° 2024-449 du 21 mai 2024) has, since 21 May 2024, imposed deepfake-labelling and related digital-content obligations, pre-dating and distinct from the AI Act's own national implementation. Article 50 of the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) became applicable on 2 August 2026 and is directly binding in France: it requires providers of AI systems in direct human interaction to disclose that fact (unless obvious), requires providers of generative AI systems to apply machine-readable marking to synthetic output, requires deployers of emotion-recognition or biometric-categorisation systems to inform affected persons, and imposes deepfake-disclosure duties. A transitional grace period until 2 December 2026 applies to the Article 50(2) machine-readable marking obligation for generative AI systems already placed on the market before 2 August 2026; content generated before that date does not need to be labelled retroactively. Instruments (2) - AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) Applies since 2026-08-02Binding - Loi n° 2024-449 du 21 mai 2024 (SREN) Date not recordedBinding Milestones - 2 Dec 2026Generative AI legacy-system marking grace period ends UpcomingAI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) Claims and evidence (5) - France's SREN law (Loi n° 2024-449 of 21 May 2024) imposes deepfake-labelling and related digital-content obligations, in force since 21 May 2024, pre-dating and distinct from the AI Act's own national designation.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Vorp Labs](https://vorplabs.com/ai-regulatory-updates/france) T3 · Retrievedthe enacted national anchor is the SREN law's deepfake provisions, in force since May 21, 2024 - Derived: Probable From 2 August 2026, Article 50 of the AI Act requires providers of AI systems in direct human interaction to disclose that fact (unless obvious), generative-AI providers to apply machine-readable marking to synthetic output, deployers of emotion-recognition/biometric-categorisation systems to inform exposed individuals, and deployers of deepfake-generating systems to disclose the artificial nature of the content.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[European Commission](https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act) T1 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026Article 50 of the AI Act applies as from 2 August 2026. - Derived: Probable A transitional grace period until 2 December 2026 applies to the Art 50(2) machine-readable marking obligation for generative AI systems already placed on the market before 2 August 2026; content generated before that date need not be labelled retroactively.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 1 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Baker Botts](https://www.bakerbotts.com/thought-leadership/publications/2026/september/eu-ai-act-article-50-transparency-obligations-go-live) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The only relief granted was a grace period, running until December 2, 2026, for generative AI systems already on the market before August 2, 2026 - Article 50 of the EU AI Act, imposing AI-interaction disclosure, synthetic-content marking, emotion-recognition/biometric notice and deepfake-disclosure duties, became applicable on 2 August 2026, directly binding in France.Confidence: Confirmed · As of 1 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[European Commission](https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/transparency-obligations-under-article-50-ai-act) T1 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026Article 50 of the AI Act applies as from 2 August 2026. - A transitional grace period until 2 December 2026 applies to the Article 50(2) machine-readable marking obligation for generative AI systems already placed on the market before 2 August 2026, with no retroactive labelling required for content generated before that date.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 1 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Baker Botts](https://www.bakerbotts.com/thought-leadership/publications/2026/september/eu-ai-act-article-50-transparency-obligations-go-live) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The only relief granted was a grace period, running until December 2, 2026, for generative AI systems already on the market before August 2, 2026 ### 06AI & Intellectual PropertyActive▾# France's text-and-data-mining copyright exception (CPI Art L.122-5-3) permits reproduction of lawfully accessed works for AI training unless the rightholder has validly opted out via a machine-readable reservation. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 2 claims · 0 milestones France's text-and-data-mining copyright exception, codified at Article L.122-5-3 of the Code de la propriété intellectuelle, permits reproduction of lawfully accessed works for AI training purposes unless the rightholder has validly opted out via a machine-readable reservation. AI model developers may rely on this exception to reproduce lawfully-accessed works for training, subject to that machine-readable opt-out. Cited evidence in this module rests solely on tier 3/4 commentary despite primary official sources existing for this jurisdiction. Claims and evidence (2) - France's text-and-data-mining copyright exception (CPI Art L.122-5-3) permits reproduction of lawfully accessed works for AI training unless the rightholder has validly opted out via a machine-readable reservation.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 28 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Draculia](https://www.draculia.fr/guides/ia-entrainement-droit-auteur-proces/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 28 Sep 2026the text-and-data-mining exception (Article L.122-5-3 of the Intellectual Property Code) permits copying lawfully-accessed works 'regardless of purpose', unless the author has objected - AI model developers may rely on the French TDM copyright exception to reproduce lawfully-accessed works for training, subject to a machine-readable opt-out.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 28 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Draculia](https://www.draculia.fr/guides/ia-entrainement-droit-auteur-proces/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 28 Sep 2026the text-and-data-mining exception (Article L.122-5-3 of the Intellectual Property Code) permits copying lawfully-accessed works 'regardless of purpose', unless the author has objected ### 07Sectoral & Public-Sector AIActive Derived: Probable▾# Code des relations entre le public et l'administration (Date not recorded). 2 instruments (2 current) · 0 obligations · 11 claims · 0 milestones Under the Code des relations entre le public et l'administration (CRPA), where a French public administration takes an individual decision founded on an algorithmic treatment, it must carry an explicit mention of that fact and, on request, must communicate in intelligible form the degree and mode of the algorithm's contribution, the data processed and their sources, and the processing parameters applied, subject to protected secrets. Administrations that use an algorithmic treatment as the basis for individual decisions must additionally publish online the rules defining the principal algorithmic treatments used in carrying out their missions, an open-data and accountability obligation distinct from the individual explanation right. Under Loi n° 78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 (Informatique et Libertés), biometric processing used to control identity or access, including AI-driven biometric systems, is subject to a prior-authorisation regime: for State bodies, authorisation takes the form of a décret en Conseil d'État issued after a reasoned, published CNIL opinion, and unauthorised deployment can attract criminal liability. The CNIL's constant doctrine treats biometric processing, including facial recognition, as disproportionate wherever a less intrusive alternative would achieve the same purpose; it has found facial-recognition access control in schools contrary to the GDPR's proportionality and minimisation principles and has imposed fines in this area. The CNIL's first (July 2025) and second (6 February 2025) recommendations address the application of the GDPR to AI models trained on personal data, setting out a methodology for documenting that analysis together with practical guidance on informing data subjects. The EU AI Act applies directly in France, having entered into force on 1 August 2024 and being applied in waves through 2 August 2028, but as of 22 October 2026 no French market-surveillance or notifying authority has been legally designated under AI Act Article 28 or Article 70. France's DDADUE bill, which would designate the DGCCRF, CNIL, ACPR, Arcom and other sectoral regulators as AI Act competent authorities, was adopted at first reading by the Senate on 18 February 2026 and transmitted to the Assemblée nationale, where it remains in committee and has not yet been examined. The governance scheme in that bill would allocate sectoral competence — DGCCRF for consumer affairs, Arcom for audiovisual, ACPR for banking and insurance, AMF for financial markets, and ANSM/HAS for health — but none of this allocation is yet binding. Separately, a private member's bill registered at the Assemblée nationale on 15 September 2026 would create a new Autorité nationale de l'intelligence artificielle with power to require prior authorisation before an AI system is placed on the market, operating without prejudice to the AI Act's own designated authorities. Instruments (2) - Code des relations entre le public et l'administration Date not recordedBinding - Loi n° 78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 (Informatique et Libertés) Date not recordedBinding Claims and evidence (11) - Derived: Probable The AI Act applies directly in France, entered into force on 1 August 2024 and is applied in waves until 2 August 2028, but no French market-surveillance or notifying authority has been legally designated under Articles 28 or 70 as of 22 October 2026.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Réglementation IA](https://reglementation-ia.fr/reglement-2024-1689-ai-act-explique) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026entered into force on 1 August 2024, applied in waves until 2 August 2028 - [imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - Derived: Probable France's DDADUE bill, which would designate the DGCCRF, CNIL, ACPR, Arcom and other sectoral regulators as AI Act competent authorities, was adopted at first reading by the Senate on 18 February 2026 and transmitted to the Assemblée nationale, where it remains in committee and has not been examined in plenary as at late October 2026 - more than a year past the Regulation's 2 August 2025 designation deadline.Confidence: Probable · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Banque des Territoires / Localtis](https://www.banquedesterritoires.fr/le-senat-valide-une-regulation-de-lia-en-mode-puzzle) T2 · RetrievedDiscussed in the Senate on 17 February 2026, the digital part of the DDADUE bill designates the AI regulators. - [imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - Derived: Probable The proposed French AI Act governance scheme allocates sectoral competence: DGCCRF for consumer affairs, Arcom for audiovisual, ACPR for banking and insurance, AMF for financial markets, and ANSM/HAS for health; none of this is yet binding.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 16 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[adevweb.com](https://www.adevweb.com/ressources/ai-act-entreprise-2026) T3 · RetrievedDGCCRF (consumer affairs), Arcom (audiovisual), ACPR (banking, insurance), AMF (financial markets), ANSM and HAS (health). - [kla.digital](https://kla.digital/fr/blog/fria-cnil-france-guide) T3 · Retrievedthe DGCCRF would be the coordinating market surveillance authority and single point of contact under Article 70 - Derived: Probable A private member's bill registered at the Assemblée nationale on 15 September 2026 would create a new 'Autorité nationale de l'intelligence artificielle' with power to require prior authorisation before an AI system is placed on the market, operating without prejudice to the AI Act's own designated authorities; the bill is not in force.Confidence: Probable · As of 15 Sep 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Assemblée nationale](https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/opendata/PIONANR5L17B3149.html) T1 · RetrievedRegistered with the Presidency of the National Assembly on 15 September 2026. - The CNIL's first (July 2025) and second (6 February 2025) recommendations explain that AI models trained on personal data can fall within GDPR scope and set out a methodology for documenting the analysis, together with practical guidance on informing data subjects.Confidence: Probable · As of 6 Feb 2025 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[CNIL / Légifrance (JORF)](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000051164307) T1 · SurfacedThe CNIL adopts a second recommendation on the application of the GDPR to the development of artificial intelligence systems. - [CNIL](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/developpement-des-systemes-dia-les-recommandations-de-la-cnil-pour-respecter-le-rgpd) T1 · Retrieved · retrieved 3 Nov 2026The CNIL has published its first recommendations on applying the GDPR to the development of AI systems, to help professionals reconcile innovation with respect for individuals' rights. - Derived: Probable Biometric processing used to control identity or access, including AI-driven biometric systems, is subject to a prior-authorisation regime under Loi 78-17: for State bodies, a décret en Conseil d'État taken after a reasoned, published CNIL opinion; unauthorised deployment can attract criminal liability of up to 5 years' imprisonment and a EUR 300,000 fine for individuals.Confidence: Probable · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Sénat](https://www.senat.fr/rap/l13-465/l13-4652.html) T1 · Retrievedthe second makes State-operated biometric data processing conditional on authorisation granted by decree of the Conseil d'État after a reasoned, published CNIL opinion - [Haas Avocats](https://www.haas-avocats.com/protection-des-donnees/vie-privee/biometrie-la-cnil-rappelle-les-principes/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 3 Nov 2026Implementing biometric control data processing without prior CNIL authorisation is unlawful and the controller incurs criminal liability, facing penalties of up to 5 years' imprisonment and a EUR 300,000 fine - Derived: Probable The CNIL's constant doctrine treats biometric processing, including facial recognition, as disproportionate wherever a less intrusive alternative achieves the same purpose; it found facial-recognition access control in schools contrary to GDPR proportionality and minimisation principles, and fined a facial-recognition database operator EUR 20 million for building a database without a legal basis.Confidence: Probable · EvidencedEvidence and sources[CNIL](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/experimentation-de-la-reconnaissance-faciale-dans-deux-lycees-la-cnil-precise-sa-position) T1 · Retrievedthe CNIL considered that the proposed system was contrary to the GDPR's core principles of proportionality and data minimisation - [gdv.fr](https://gdv.fr/blog/reconnaissance-faciale-en-entreprise-la-loi-en-2026--n66) T3 · Surfaced · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The reference sanction in this area remains the one imposed on Clearview AI: a EUR 20 million fine by the CNIL - Under the CRPA, where an administration takes an individual decision founded on an algorithmic treatment, it must carry an explicit mention of that fact and, on request, communicate in intelligible form the degree and mode of the algorithm's contribution, the data processed and their sources, and the processing parameters applied, subject to protected secrets.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T1) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Légifrance](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000031366350/LEGISCTA000031367696/) T1 · SurfacedThe administration communicates to the person subject to an individual decision based on an algorithmic treatment, at their request, in an intelligible form - [Houdart & Associés](https://www.houdart.org/les-obligations-de-transparence-des-algorithmes-dans-le-secteur-public/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 3 Nov 2026More precisely, the administration may only take individual administrative decisions based exclusively on an algorithm under certain conditions. - Administrations using an algorithmic treatment as the basis for individual decisions must publish online the rules defining the principal algorithmic treatments used in carrying out their missions, as an open-data/accountability obligation distinct from the individual explanation right.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[guides.data.gouv.fr (Etalab)](https://guides.data.gouv.fr/guides/autres-ressources-utiles/les-algorithmes-publics-pourquoi-et-comment-les-expliquer/les-algorithmes-publics-enjeux-et-obligations) T1 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026provide general information (Article L.312-1-3) ... provide individual information on request (Article R.311-3-1-2) - French public administrations must disclose and explain algorithm-based individual decisions on request, subject to protected secrets.Confidence: Probable · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Légifrance](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000031366350/LEGISCTA000031367696/) T1 · SurfacedThe administration communicates to the person subject to an individual decision based on an algorithmic treatment, at their request, in an intelligible form - Where a French public administration takes an individual decision based on algorithmic processing, the decision must carry an explicit statement of this, and on request the administration must explain the processing's degree of contribution, data used, parameters and weighting applied.Confidence: Probable · As of 9 Oct 2016 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Légifrance (DILA)](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000031366350/LEGISCTA000031367696/) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art L311-3-1an individual decision taken on the basis of algorithmic processing shall carry an explicit statement informing the person concerned. - [Légifrance (DILA)](https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000033205535) T1 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art L311-5subject to [Art L.311-5], an individual decision taken on the basis of algorithmic processing shall carry an explicit statement informing the person concerned. ### 08Safety & Incident ReportingActive Derived: Probable▾# Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 1 claim · 0 milestones Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the system's lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and must ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output. Claims and evidence (1) - Derived: Probable Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[EASA (AI Office, DG CNECT)](https://www.easa.europa.eu/ro/downloads/140097/en) T1 · RetrievedRisk management system to minimise risks for deployers and affected persons ### 09Standards & ConformityActive Derived: Probable▾# Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 1 claim · 0 milestones The only conformity-relevant substrate currently recorded for France is the AI Act's risk-management requirement for high-risk AI system providers: providers must operate a risk-management system across the system's lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and must ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output. Claims and evidence (1) - Derived: Probable Providers of high-risk AI systems must operate a risk-management system across the lifecycle to minimise risks to deployers and affected persons, and ensure sufficient transparency for deployers to interpret the system's output.Confidence: Confirmed · EvidencedEvidence and sources[EASA (AI Office, DG CNECT)](https://www.easa.europa.eu/ro/downloads/140097/en) T1 · RetrievedRisk management system to minimise risks for deployers and affected persons ### 10Authorities & EnforcementActive Derived: Probable▾# As of 22 October 2026, no French authority has been legally designated under AI Act Arts 28 or 70, leaving the DGCCRF/CNIL/ACPR/Arcom designation scheme in the pending DDADUE bill rather than in force. 0 instruments (0 current) · 0 obligations · 6 claims · 0 milestones Breach of the AI Act's Article 5 prohibited-practice provisions carries fines of up to EUR 35 million or 7% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher. The Digital Omnibus on AI extends the AI Act's existing SME penalty-calculation and documentation simplifications to small mid-cap companies under Article 99(6) and (6a). The CNIL has already exercised enforcement powers in adjacent biometric-AI matters: it imposed a EUR 20 million fine on an operator for building a facial-recognition database without a legal basis, cited as the reference sanction in this area, and its constant doctrine treats biometric processing, including facial recognition, as disproportionate wherever a less intrusive alternative would achieve the same purpose, having found facial-recognition access control in schools contrary to the GDPR's proportionality and minimisation principles. France has not enacted the statute designating its AI Act national competent authorities, a step now more than a year past the Regulation's deadline. As of 22 October 2026, no French authority has been legally designated under AI Act Article 28 or Article 70, leaving the DGCCRF/CNIL/ACPR/Arcom designation scheme in the pending DDADUE bill rather than in force. Claims and evidence (6) - Derived: Probable As of 22 October 2026, no French authority has been legally designated under AI Act Arts 28 or 70, leaving the DGCCRF/CNIL/ACPR/Arcom designation scheme in the pending DDADUE bill rather than in force.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - Derived: Probable CNIL imposed a EUR 20 million fine on an operator for building a facial-recognition database without a legal basis, cited as the reference sanction in this area.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[gdv.fr](https://gdv.fr/blog/reconnaissance-faciale-en-entreprise-la-loi-en-2026--n66) T3 · Surfaced · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The reference sanction in this area remains the one imposed on Clearview AI: a EUR 20 million fine by the CNIL - Derived: Probable The Digital Omnibus extends the AI Act's SME penalty-calculation and documentation simplifications to small mid-cap companies (SMCs) under Article 99(6) and (6a).Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[beresol.eu](https://brubru.beresol.eu/eucanon/2026-1744_aiomnibus/) T3 · RetrievedThe AI Act's SME simplifications now extend to SMCs. - Derived: Probable The CNIL's constant doctrine treats biometric processing, including facial recognition, as disproportionate wherever a less intrusive alternative achieves the same purpose; it found facial-recognition access control in schools contrary to GDPR proportionality and minimisation principles, and fined a facial-recognition database operator EUR 20 million for building a database without a legal basis.Confidence: Probable · EvidencedEvidence and sources[CNIL](https://www.cnil.fr/fr/experimentation-de-la-reconnaissance-faciale-dans-deux-lycees-la-cnil-precise-sa-position) T1 · Retrievedthe CNIL considered that the proposed system was contrary to the GDPR's core principles of proportionality and data minimisation - [gdv.fr](https://gdv.fr/blog/reconnaissance-faciale-en-entreprise-la-loi-en-2026--n66) T3 · Surfaced · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The reference sanction in this area remains the one imposed on Clearview AI: a EUR 20 million fine by the CNIL - France has not yet enacted the statute designating its AI Act national competent authorities, over a year past the Regulation's deadline.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - Breach of the AI Act's Art.5 prohibitions carries fines of up to EUR 35 million or 7% of global turnover, whichever is higher.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[euaiact.com](https://www.euaiact.com/blog/eu-ai-act-penalties-enforcement) T3 · Retrieved€35 million or 7% of total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. ### 11Sandboxes & Transitional ReliefActive Derived: Probable▾# Digital Omnibus on AI (Valid from 2026-07-27). 1 instrument (1 current) · 0 obligations · 5 claims · 4 milestones · Next: 2 Dec 2026 (New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply) Article 57 of the AI Act requires each Member State to establish at least one national AI regulatory sandbox giving fee-free priority access to SMEs; the Digital Omnibus on AI extended the original 2 August 2026 deadline for that sandbox to 2 August 2027. France has not confirmed an operational Article 57 sandbox, and no French market-surveillance or notifying authority has yet been legally designated under AI Act Article 28 or Article 70 as of 22 October 2026. It remains uncertain whether a sandbox will be operational by the extended deadline, and uncertain whether the authority responsible for France's sandbox will be designated before then, since the DDADUE bill that would create the designation scheme remains pending. Instruments (1) - Digital Omnibus on AI Valid from 2026-07-27Binding Milestones - 2 Dec 2026New Art 5 prohibitions (intimate-image/CSAM) apply UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2027National AI regulatory sandbox deadline UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Dec 2027Annex III high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI - 2 Aug 2028Annex I high-risk AI application date UpcomingDigital Omnibus on AI Claims and evidence (5) - Derived: Probable The AI Act applies directly in France, entered into force on 1 August 2024 and is applied in waves until 2 August 2028, but no French market-surveillance or notifying authority has been legally designated under Articles 28 or 70 as of 22 October 2026.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 22 Oct 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[Réglementation IA](https://reglementation-ia.fr/reglement-2024-1689-ai-act-explique) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026entered into force on 1 August 2024, applied in waves until 2 August 2028 - [imiel.dev](https://imiel.dev/explore/eu-ai-act-2026/france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 22 Oct 2026No French authority has legally been designated under Articles 28 or 70 of the AI Act as of 22 October 2026 - Article 57 of the AI Act requires each Member State to establish at least one national AI regulatory sandbox giving fee-free priority access to SMEs; the original 2 August 2026 deadline was extended to 2 August 2027 by the Digital Omnibus.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[rgpd.com](https://rgpd.com/ai-act/chapter-6-measures-in-support-of-innovation/article-57-ai-regulatory-sandboxes/) T3 · RetrievedArticle 57 of the AI Act requires EU Member States to create AI regulatory sandboxes by August 2026, providing a controlled environment where businesses can safely test innovative AI products. - [regulation-ai.eu](https://www.regulation-ai.eu/en/omnibus/) T3 · RetrievedAnnex III standalone high-risk AI to 2 December 2027; Annex I embedded high-risk AI to 2 August 2028; the national regulatory sandbox obligation to 2 August 2027 - Derived: Probable France has not confirmed an operational Article 57 AI regulatory sandbox; the authority responsible for France's sandbox has not yet been designated because the DDADUE bill remains pending.Confidence: Uncertain (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[regulatoryai.eu](https://www.regulatoryai.eu/ai-act-france/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026France must have an operational Article 57 sandbox by the EU deadline; its establishment is not yet confirmed. - [Cabinet Lacour Avocat](https://www.lacour-avocat.fr/bac-a-sable-reglementaire-innovation/) T3 · Retrieved · retrieved 4 Nov 2026The authority responsible for France's AI regulatory sandbox has therefore not yet been designated - France has not confirmed an operational Art.57 AI regulatory sandbox; the deadline for establishing one was extended to 2 August 2027.Confidence: Uncertain (capped: best source is T3) · EvidencedEvidence and sources[rgpd.com](https://rgpd.com/ai-act/chapter-6-measures-in-support-of-innovation/article-57-ai-regulatory-sandboxes/) T3 · RetrievedArticle 57 of the AI Act requires EU Member States to create AI regulatory sandboxes by August 2026, providing a controlled environment where businesses can safely test innovative AI products. - Member States must have at least one operational national AI regulatory sandbox by 2 August 2027, a date moved back from 2 August 2026.Confidence: Probable (capped: best source is T3) · As of 27 Jul 2026 · EvidencedEvidence and sources[LegalToCode](https://legaltocode.com/en/ai-act/cl-57/) T3 · Surfaced · retrieved 10 Nov 2026 · Art 57(1)The deadline for an operational regulatory sandbox moved from 2 August 2026 to 2 August 2027. ### 12Commercial ActivityQuiet▾# Nothing recorded for this module in the research of 2026-11-11. 0 instruments · 0 obligations · 0 claims Nothing recorded for this module in the research of 2026-11-11. No modules match. Filters combine as OR inside a group and AND across groups. Reset all filters ## Authorities No authorities recorded in this research. ## Enforcement actions No enforcement actions recorded in this research. ## Cases No cases recorded in this research. ## Consultations Consultation Status CNIL public consultation on GDPR application to AI system development (first batch) Open CNIL public consultation on GDPR application to AI system development (second batch) Open What this record does not yet establish is set out on the [transparency register](/gaps/#gap-fr); its dated events are on the [regulatory calendar](/calendar/?jid=FR). Think something on this page is wrong? [Report an error](/legal/#contact). Technical provenance (record schema, run ID & build metadata) Schema version artificial-intelligence-record-v2.12 Research run ID aic-union-FR-2026-11-04 Page model module-card-page-v1 Renderer render_jid_aic_v13 Build date 12 Nov 2026