Skip to content

Is there an AI for this?

Use cases
Stacks
Tools
Models
Jurisdictions
Hire an FDE
Ask a question

Loading the jurisdictions.

About
How we research
Sources
Privacy
Terms

FDEs

Hire an FDE
Forward-deployed engineers
Become an FDE
FDE Academy
Field Notes
Deployment Reports

LLM interpretation: openai

Structured issue-spotting to support your own review — not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources and your counsel.

Home
Jurisdictions

Compliance layer

Jurisdictions

Structured issue-spotting by jurisdiction: the principal privacy framework, the AI-specific rules, the regulators, what crossing a border involves, and the instruments themselves with their status and dates. Every entry links to the primary source and carries the date it was last reviewed.

Published: 7
Instruments: 54

Structured issue-spotting to support your own review — not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources and your counsel.

Europe

2 jurisdictions

01European UnionRegulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR). Directly applicable in every Member State and unamended as of the review date. An AI deployment engages Articles 5 and 6 on principles and lawful basis, 9 on special categories, 13 and 14 on information, 22 on decisions based solely on automated processing, 28 on processors, 32 on security, 35 on impact assessments and Chapter V on transfers out of the EEA. Member States retain room to legislate on employment, which is where Germany’s BDSG § 26 comes in.EUreviewed 20 Aug 20268 instruments8 in force
02United KingdomUK GDPR, as retained and amended, together with the Data Protection Act 2018. The core duties are unchanged in shape — lawful basis, transparency, purpose limitation, security, processor contracts, international transfers — but the automated decision-making regime now sits in Articles 22A to 22D rather than Article 22. Article 22A defines a decision as based solely on automated processing where there is no meaningful human involvement, and a significant decision as one producing a legal or similarly significant effect. Whether human involvement is meaningful must be considered in light of the extent to which the decision is reached by profiling.

GB·reviewed 20 Aug 2026

6 instruments6 in force

North asia

5 jurisdictions

01China (mainland)Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), in force since 1 November 2021. Requires a lawful basis, notice, and separate consent for defined activities including providing personal information to a third party, publicising it, processing sensitive personal information and sending it abroad. Sensitive personal information needs a specific purpose, sufficient necessity and strict protective measures. A personal information protection impact assessment is required before high-risk processing, including any outbound transfer. Article 38 sets the outbound routes. Entrusted processing must be governed by a contract that fixes purpose, period, method and protective measures.CNreviewed 20 Aug 202611 instruments10 in force
02Hong KongPersonal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486). The Ordinance applies to any person who controls the collection, holding, processing or use of personal data, and works through six Data Protection Principles in Schedule 1 covering collection, accuracy and retention, use, security, openness and access. Data processors are not directly regulated: the data user stays responsible and must impose the requirements on its processors by contract or other means. Contravening a Data Protection Principle is not itself an offence, but the Commissioner may issue an enforcement notice and contravening that notice is.HKreviewed 20 Aug 202610 instruments10 in force
03JapanAct on the Protection of Personal Information (個人情報の保護に関する法律, Act No. 57 of 2003). Requires the purpose of use to be specified and adhered to, restricts acquisition and third-party provision, sets security control measures, and imposes duties when personal data is entrusted to a contractor — which is what using a model provider usually is. Transfers to a third party in a foreign country are subject to their own regime, with an information duty to the individual. The e-Gov entry currently shows unenforced provisions pending, so check which version applies before relying on an article number.JPreviewed 20 Aug 20265 instruments4 in force
04South KoreaPersonal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법). The version in force is Act No. 20897, effective 2 October 2025. It sets consent and alternative bases, purpose limitation, retention limits, security duties, breach notification and cross-border rules, and since March 2023 has carried Article 37-2, the right of a data subject to object to or refuse a decision made by a completely automated system — expressly including systems applying artificial intelligence — where that decision significantly affects their rights or duties. An amendment promulgated on 10 March 2026 takes effect on 11 September 2026.KRreviewed 20 Aug 20268 instruments6 in force
05TaiwanPersonal Data Protection Act (個人資料保護法). Applies to public and non-public agencies, with separate collection and use rules for each. Notice at collection, purpose limitation, and a set of statutory bases are the core; special categories including medical records, genetic data, sexual life, health examination and criminal records are subject to a narrower regime. Article 21 lets the competent authority restrict international transfer in defined circumstances — under the text in force, that is the central sector regulator, and restrictions are issued sector by sector rather than as a general adequacy list.TWreviewed 20 Aug 20266 instruments5 in force