The rules this is built from, by market
The directory is grounded on rule sets The Art of Service holds: the EU AI Act, the NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001 and the privacy law of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. This page names the held rule set that matters in each market, so a reader can see what the tool reads for them. Where a market has no AI statute held, the page says so.
European Union
EU AI Act, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744. The spine of the whole directory: 43 obligations, each stated in our words and cited to its article. Read the regulation.
GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Held and read for the data-protection side of an AI system that processes personal data. Read the regulation.
United States
NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). Held, and the framework the directory cross-references each EU AI Act obligation to. Read the framework.
Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act (proposed SB 24-205). Held, and named here as the state AI statute in the rule set. There is no federal United States AI statute held; where a United States reader needs one, this page says so rather than implying coverage. Read the bill.
United Kingdom
UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. Held and verified against the official consolidated legislation, and what applies to a United Kingdom AI vendor that processes personal data. Read the Act.
PECR, the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003. Held, and what applies to electronic marketing and cookies. Read the regulations.
Australia
Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles. Held, and what applies to an Australian AI vendor handling personal information. Read the Act.
Australia Guidance for AI Adoption (2025) and the Australia AI Ethics Framework. Held, and named as the Australian AI guidance in the rule set. Australia has no AI statute of general application held; this page says so.
What the grounding means, and what it does not
A rule set is held and read, and every obligation page points to the article it came from. Holding a rule set is not legal advice and is not certification. The four-market view is there so a reader can see what the tool reads for them; it is not a statement that a given law applies to a given company. Read the method.