Fifteen questions professionals ask about proving CSDDD compliance — due diligence, remediation, civil liability, transition plans — each mapped to the SOURCE 0 term that answers it, and to the article it rests on.

Fourteen questions professionals ask about proving Medical Device AI (MDR × AI Act) compliance, mapped to the SOURCE 0 doctrinal vocabulary.

The Digital Omnibus deferral is no longer political. It is law, in force since 27 July 2026. What remains unprovable is what organisations knew and decided during the twenty-five days before that.

The Digital Omnibus on AI answers dozens of implementation questions. None of them answer how an organisation proves what it knew and did, using a record it doesn't control.

A postponement everyone expects is not the same as a postponement that has happened. Until the Digital Omnibus is published in the Official Journal, Articles 9 to 15 of the AI Act still apply from 2 August 2026 exactly as written.

The Commission's Article 50 Guidelines confirm that AI-generated content produced before 2 August 2026 escapes retroactive marking — unless published afterward, when the full obligation returns. This article sets out why the generation date at the centre of that rule is a claim, not a fact, and what an independent seal would add.

Article 50 of the AI Act does not impose one transparency duty but four, each attached to a different system function and a different actor. This article sets out the content of each obligation, independent of the separate question of how disclosure is proven, and states the current position of the Digital Omnibus deferral as of 13 July 2026.

Article 50 of the AI Act requires disclosure that a person is interacting with an AI system. It does not require proof that the disclosure preceded the interaction. This article states the current status of the Digital Omnibus on AI as of 12 July 2026 and sets out the pre-execution attestation mechanism that closes the resulting evidentiary gap.

From 2 August 2026, Article 50 requires disclosure that a person is interacting with an AI system. This deadline is unaffected by the Digital Omnibus deferral of Articles 9-15. SOURCE 0 seals the disclosure configuration before the interactions it governs.

The Digital Omnibus on AI defers the enforcement of high-risk obligations but leaves evidentiary exposure unchanged. When a system acts before the deferred deadlines, the governance state operative at T-0 remains the central question in civil, insurance, and contractual proceedings. The postponement affects regulatory temporality, not the requirement to hold an independently fixed, opposable governance record. The proof gap persists throughout the deferral window, closed only by a pre-execution cryptographic attestation architecture such as SOURCE 0.