Sourcing standards
Every regulatory claim links to a primary source: an Official Journal text, a regulator's published guidance, an enforcement decision, or a peer-reviewed paper where appropriate. Secondary commentary is cited as such, never as the primary authority. When an article describes how a rule applies in practice, that interpretation is presented as analysis, with the underlying primary source linked alongside.
If a claim cannot be sourced to a primary regulator publication, or in its absence to a credible institutional analysis, it does not appear in the article.
Independence
AI Law Guide does not accept sponsored content, advertorial, or vendor-paid placements. We do not maintain affiliate relationships with vendors mentioned in articles. AdSense ads on the site are clearly distinguished as advertising, never integrated into editorial content. The author has no financial relationship with the regulators, agencies, or vendors discussed in any article.
Update and revision policy
Articles are dated published and dated modified. Material updates (those that change the article's central recommendation or correct a substantive claim) carry a visible "Updated …" label and a brief revision note explaining what changed and when. Minor copy edits, formatting passes, and link refreshes do not get a revision note.
We aim to revisit each article at least quarterly to confirm cited rules and citations remain accurate, and to revise where regulators have published new guidance.
Conflict of interest disclosure
If the author has any consulting, advisory, or financial relationship with an organisation that materially affects an article's coverage, that relationship is disclosed in the article. As of publication, no such relationships exist for any article on this site.
AI use disclosure
We use generative AI tools as drafting aids: outlining, copy editing, language passes, format conversion. We do not use AI tools as the source of regulatory claims, citations, or factual statements. Every fact and citation in an article is verified by a human against a primary source before publication.
Where an article reports on AI-system behaviour or evaluates an AI product, that work uses the same human-verified, primary-source standard as any other claim.
Reader feedback
Reader corrections, questions, and suggestions are welcome. Send them via the contact form or email the editorial address listed there. We acknowledge credible correction requests within 48 hours and follow up with a confirmation when the article is updated. Our corrections policy sets out the timestamp-and-note convention we use.
Last reviewed: May 1, 2026. We revise this policy when our practices change, not on a fixed schedule.