“I want to use a photo created by AI”
Can I use a photo created by artificial intelligence in advertising
Answer
Yes, but
Yes, but where the content is a deep fake, Article 50(4) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 requires you, as the deployer of the AI system, to disclose that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated. Under Article 3, a deep fake is content that resembles existing persons, objects, places or events and would falsely appear to be authentic.
Allowed only if you meet the conditions; miss one and it becomes unlawful.
This is the only one of the marketing questions that does not rest on a Slovak act. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 is directly binding and directly applicable in the Slovak Republic, so it governs you as directly as the Commercial Code does; no Slovak act replaces it.
What matters is the role you are in. Article 50 distinguishes the provider of an AI system, that is, the party that develops or supplies the model, from the deployer, that is, the party that puts it to use. A company generating an image for an advert is a deployer and its duty sits in paragraph 4, not in paragraph 2.
The conditions the answer rests on
- 01
What decides is whether the content meets the deep fake definition
Under Article 3, a deep fake is content created or manipulated with AI that resembles existing persons, objects, places, entities or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful. Abstract graphics do not meet that definition; a generated photograph of a satisfied customer is closer to it.
- 02
The duty is to disclose, not to hide it in metadata
Article 50(4) speaks of disclosing that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated. The machine-readable marking under paragraph 2 is the system provider's duty and does not replace your duty towards the viewer.
- 03
An artistic work has a lighter regime, not none
Where the content forms part of an evidently artistic, creative, satirical or fictional work, the duty under Article 50(4) is limited to disclosing the existence of such content in a manner that does not hamper the enjoyment of the work. An advertising photograph of a product does not usually rely on that exception.
- 04
Labelling does not settle whether the image misleads about the product
A generated image showing a feature the product does not have is assessed alongside under § 10(1) of Act 108/2024 Coll. as misleading action. A label saying 'created by AI' does not close that question.
Where we will not answer for you
The wording of Article 3 speaks of resemblance to existing persons, objects, places, entities or events. It does not determine where the line falls for a generated person who represents nobody in particular but comes across as a real human being, and that is the most common case in advertising. The Regulation also imposes the duties under its individual articles on different dates, and supervision over it is subject to separate Slovak rules which we do not have in the corpus. If a larger campaign rests on AI content, that is a question for a lawyer.
How to do it in practice
A clear sentence right next to the image
A short disclosure next to the content matches what Article 50(4) asks for and costs one sentence. Whoever writes it does not have to work out the deep fake definition.
Graphics instead of a photorealistic scene
An illustration that does not pose as a record of reality does not resemble existing persons, places or events, so it does not meet the deep fake definition in Article 3. The labelling question then never arises at all.
A real photograph of your own work
Your own photograph raises neither the labelling question nor the question whether the image matches the product. Where a customer is photographed, however, § 12 of the Civil Code and the permission of the person shown apply.
What the statute says
Wording taken from the official register. Every excerpt is machine-compared against the statutes in our database, so it cannot drift from what the law actually says.
Subjekty nasadzujúce systém AI, ktorý generuje alebo manipuluje obrazový, zvukový alebo video obsah, ktorý predstavuje deep fake, zverejnia, že obsah bol umelo vytvorený alebo manipulovaný. Táto povinnosť sa neuplatňuje, ak je použitie povolené zákonom na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov. Ak je obsah súčasťou zjavne umeleckého, kreatívneho, satirického, fiktívneho alebo analogického diela alebo programu, povinnosti týkajúce sa transparentnosti stanovené v tomto odseku sa obmedzujú na zverejnenie existencie takéhoto vygenerovaného alebo zmanipulovaného obsahu, a to primeraným spôsobom, ktorý nebráni zobrazeniu diela a zážitku z neho.„deep fake“ je obrazový obsah, audioobsah alebo videoobsah vytvorený alebo zmanipulovaný pomocou AI, ktorý sa podobá na existujúce osoby, objekty, miesta, subjekty alebo udalosti a osobe by sa falošne javil ako autentický alebo pravdivýPoskytovatelia systémov AI vrátane systémov AI na všeobecné účely, ktoré generujú syntetický zvukový, obrazový, video alebo textový obsah, zabezpečia, aby boli výstupy systému AI označené v strojovo čitateľnom formáte a zistiteľné ako umelo vygenerované alebo zmanipulované.Klamlivé konanie je obchodná praktika, ktorá zapríčiňuje alebo môže zapríčiniť, že priemerný spotrebiteľ urobí rozhodnutie o obchodnej transakcii, ktoré by inak neurobil, pretože obsahuje nesprávne informácie a je preto nepravdivá, alebo akýmkoľvek spôsobom uvádza do omylu alebo môže uviesť do omylu priemerného spotrebiteľaPísomnosti osobnej povahy, podobizne, obrazové snímky a obrazové a zvukové záznamy týkajúce sa fyzickej osoby alebo jej prejavov osobnej povahy sa smú vyhotoviť alebo použiť len s jej privolením.Frequently asked questions
Does the Artificial Intelligence Act apply directly in Slovakia?
Yes. It is a regulation, and under Union law it is directly binding and directly applicable in the member states. There is no Slovak act that replaces it; the Slovak rules deal with supervision, not with the duties themselves.
Do I have to label every image created by AI?
Article 50(4) ties the duty to content that is a deep fake as defined in Article 3, that is, content that resembles existing persons, objects, places or events and would falsely appear to be authentic. Abstract graphics do not meet that definition.
Is it not enough that the model marks the output itself?
The machine-readable marking under Article 50(2) is the duty of the AI system provider. The deployer's duty under paragraph 4 is to disclose that the content was artificially generated, which is a different thing from data hidden in a file.
Can I generate a photo of a customer who does not exist?
If such a photograph accompanies a review, it asserts something about the product that did not happen, and it is assessed under § 10(1) of Act 108/2024 Coll. The question of resemblance to an existing person is governed by the deep fake definition in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, and we will not draw that line for you here.