Skip to main content
AI Policy File

Corrections and legal-content change log

Material source, status, date, applicability, or citation errors are recorded here rather than silently overwritten. This log identifies what changed, why it changed, the official source, affected public material, and remaining review work.

October 14, 2026 · Corrected; substantive review remains overdue

California signing announcement supersedes the pending-status statement

Affected framework
California AI Transparency Act (SB 942, as amended by AB 853)
Prior information
The tracker, California guide, checker explanation, and source metadata described SB 1000 as enrolled and not current law based on a September 9 status check.
Corrected information
The Governor announced signing SB 1000 and AB 2713 on September 30, 2026. This summary has not yet been reconciled with their final enacted text.
Reason
The Governor's official September 30 announcement lists both bills among legislation signed. This supports correcting the signing status, not certifying substantive duties or effective dates.
Affected checker versions
checker-2026-09-09.1
Affected templates
No illustrative wording or template changed.
Generated documents and users
No customer documents were accessed or assessed in this correction. No customer records were accessed; the affected population has not been assessed.
Reviewer
Codex official-source verification; no attorney review claimed; no substantive human review claimed.
Resolution
Corrected signing-status copy and provenance, added the official announcement, and updated the status monitor. Existing substantive provisions, human-review dates and SOURCE REVIEW OVERDUE remain unchanged; reconciliation with final enacted text is outstanding.

August 29, 2026 · Corrected; substantive review remains overdue

New York guide used clauses removed before enactment

Affected framework
New York synthetic performer advertising law
Prior information
The guide said advertising media could become responsible after written notice and a cure period and separately described a disclosure-removal prohibition.
Corrected information
Those clauses appeared in an earlier bill version but are absent from enacted S.8420-A and current General Business Law § 396-b. Current subdivision 8 instead broadly excludes an advertising medium by which a violating advertisement is published or disseminated. Subdivision 3's actual-knowledge condition attaches to the producer or creator.
Reason
An official-text comparison found that wording from the original bill had been carried into the enacted-law summary.
Affected checker versions
checker-2026-08-02.1
Affected templates
The unversioned sample sentence was not affected by the removed clauses.
Generated documents and users
The site had no saved or generated customer documents. No account or identifiable stored-output population existed for notification.
Reviewer
AI-assisted official-source check; no attorney review claimed.
Resolution
Removed the clauses, corrected the role and exclusion, made the codified source primary, added regression coverage, and retained the overdue state pending substantive human review.

August 29, 2026 · Corrected; substantive review remains overdue

California B.O.T. Act enforcement note overstated the cited source

Affected framework
California B.O.T. Act
Prior information
The checker data said Business and Professions Code § 17941 was tied to California unfair-competition law.
Corrected information
The cited section does not state that linkage, a fixed per-message fine, or its own remedial schedule. Consequences depend on other applicable law, the enforcement path, and the facts.
Reason
The official codified section and chaptered SB 1001 did not support the prior enforcement characterization.
Affected checker versions
checker-2026-08-02.1
Affected templates
The bot disclosure example was not affected.
Generated documents and users
The site had no saved or generated customer documents. No account or identifiable stored-output population existed for notification.
Reviewer
AI-assisted official-source check; no attorney review claimed.
Resolution
Removed the unsupported enforcement linkage, added source-version metadata and regression coverage, and retained the overdue state pending substantive human review.

August 29, 2026 · Corrected; substantive review remains overdue

EU Article 50 summary omitted the amended code-of-practice mechanism

Affected framework
EU AI Act Article 50 transparency obligations
Prior information
The page described Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 only through its narrow Article 50(2) transition and described the voluntary Code without the formal adequacy assessments.
Corrected information
Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 also replaced Article 50(7), requiring the Commission to facilitate Union-level codes and assess whether adherence is adequate. The Commission and AI Board formally assessed the voluntary Code as adequate for Article 50(2), (4), and (5), while stating that adherence is not conclusive proof of compliance.
Reason
The official amending Regulation, Commission opinion, and AI Board assessment showed that the prior summary was materially incomplete.
Affected checker versions
checker-2026-08-02.1
Affected templates
The illustrative deepfake disclosure sentence did not state the omitted mechanism.
Generated documents and users
The site had no saved or generated customer documents. No account or identifiable stored-output population existed for notification.
Reviewer
AI-assisted official-source check; no attorney review claimed.
Resolution
Added Article 50(7), adequacy limits, official documents and hashes, checker/source provenance, and retained the overdue state pending substantive human review.

Report a correction

Email hello@aipolicyfile.com with the page, disputed statement, and an official source URL. Do not include confidential facts or ask for advice about a specific legal matter. Read the editorial standards for the review process.