The tech industry remains concerned about a newly released draft of the Code of Practice on General-Purpose Artificial Intelligence (GPAI), which aims to help AI providers comply with the EU's AI Act.

The proposed rules, which cover transparency, copyright, risk assessment, and mitigation, have sparked significant debate, especially among copyright holders and publishers.

Industry representatives argue that the draft still presents serious issues, particularly regarding copyright obligations and external risk assessments, which they believe could hinder innovation.

Tech lobby groups, such as the CCIA and DOT Europe, have expressed dissatisfaction with the latest draft, highlighting that it continues to impose burdensome requirements beyond the scope of the original AI Act.

Notably, the mandatory third-party risk assessments both before and after deployment remain a point of contention. Despite some improvements in the new version, these provisions are seen as unnecessary and potentially damaging to the industry.

Copyright concerns remain central, with organisations like News Media Europe warning that the draft still fails to respect copyright law. They argue that AI companies should not be merely expected to make 'best efforts' not to use content without proper authorisation.

Additionally, the draft is criticised for failing to fully address fundamental rights risks, which, according to experts, should be a primary concern for AI model providers.

The draft is open for feedback until 30 March, with the final version expected to be released in May. However, the European Commission's ability to formalise the Code under the AI Act, which comes into full effect in 2027, remains uncertain.

Meanwhile, the issue of copyright and AI is also being closely examined by the European Parliament.