AI Act and listing photos: who discloses what, exactly
From 2 August 2026, an agency publishing an AI-generated or AI-edited property photo must disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated (Article 50(4)). Machine-readable marking of the file is a separate obligation, and it sits with the software vendor (Article 50(2)). Two duties, two different parties.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 applies from 2 August 2026. It creates two distinct obligations that are routinely conflated: machine-readable marking of the file, which falls on the software vendor (the « provider »), and disclosure on the publication itself, which falls on the agency that publishes (the « deployer »). This guide isolates what actually falls on an estate agency, cites the articles behind it, and sets out three concrete steps.
A virtually staged living room resembles an existing place and would falsely appear authentic to a viewer — which is precisely the definition of a « deep fake » under Article 3(60).
| Critere | Provider (the software vendor) | Deployer (the publishing agency) |
|---|---|---|
| Definition in the text | A person or body that develops an AI system, or has one developed, and places it on the market or puts it into service under its own name or trademark (Article 3(3)). | A person or body using an AI system under its authority, except in the course of a personal non-professional activity (Article 3(4)). |
| The exact duty | Ensure outputs are « marked in a machine-readable format and detectable as artificially generated or manipulated » (Article 50(2)). | Disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated, where it constitutes a deep fake (Article 50(4)). |
| Expected form | A technical solution carried in the file. Recital 133 cites « watermarks, metadata identifications, cryptographic methods for proving provenance and authenticity ». | Information given « in a clear and distinguishable manner at the latest at the time of the first interaction or exposure » (Article 50(5)). |
| Who carries it when you use an off-the-shelf tool | The vendor, including where it is established outside the Union, as long as the tool is used within the Union. | You, the agency. Your vendor meeting its own obligation does not discharge yours. |
| Exposure | Up to EUR 15 000 000 or 3 % of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher (Article 99(4)(g)). | Same ceiling. For SMEs and start-ups, Article 99(6) reverses it: whichever of the two is lower applies. |
Go through your visual types: staging an empty room, decluttering, restyling, renovation previews, sky replacement, exposure correction.
Add fixed wording to your listing templates and portal feeds instead of leaving it to each negotiator. For example: « Image edited using artificial intelligence, for illustration purposes. »
Keep a one-page internal note: which visuals are in scope, what wording you use, from what date, which tool you use, and what its vendor commits to under Article 50(2).
Decluttering: the furniture is removed and the floor and walls are reconstructed. The photo shows an existing place in a state that is not its own — removing falls within Article 3(60) just as adding does.
Altering a finish: the volume and the furniture are preserved, only the wall changes. A buyer viewing the property finds a different state from the listing — disclosure covers that gap.
A tool that does not leave you alone with this
Machine-readable marking is the vendor's duty, not yours. What remains is your disclosure line on the listing, which this guide lets you settle once. Try CasaNova on a full property and judge the output first.