Legal edition
The highest court in education sets the boundary of AI fraud, while phishing and autonomous AI attacks put your duty of confidentiality under more pressure than ever.
Council of State: anyone who wants to penalise AI fraud must be able to prove it
The highest court in education is clear: suspicion is not enough. Without solid evidence and clear rules, a sanction will not hold.
On 31 August, an analysis appeared of three rulings by the Council of State on the use of AI in dissertations. In one case, a student who had fabricated sources in his reference list was still acquitted of fraud. The reason: the university could not prove it sufficiently. Two other students did receive a penalty, partly because they had not included a mandatory AI declaration. The core of the rulings: solid evidence and clear, enforceable rules are essential.
Background for subscribersThe Council of State shows that you can only penalise AI fraud if you can also prove it. Do you have rules about AI use within your own organisation? If so, make sure those rules are clear, written down, and enforceable. As a deployer under the AI Regulation, you also bear your own responsibility for human oversight and transparency, even when using an external product. The AI literacy obligation under Article 4 has been running since 2 February 2025: do not wait for a new deadline. And pay attention to security: the breach at Hugging Face and the explosive growth of AI phishing show that confidential client data needs extra protection.
AI Act: as a 'user' of AI, you share responsibility yourself, not just the supplier
The AI Regulation draws a sharp distinction between the builder of an AI system and the organisation that deploys it. If your firm or employer uses an AI tool to screen CVs or assess documents, for example, you are a 'deployer' and you share legal responsibility for fairness and transparency. Article 26 requires, among other things, human oversight by qualified persons and notification of those involved.
Background for subscribersThis is a taster.
Subscribers read the whole Legal edition: every story, each with its background in plain language.
Subscribe →