AI Act and generative content: European retail in limbo

The context: when the regulation doesn't know its subject

The European AI Act entered into force in 2024 and began its rollout during 2025. However, one of its most critical points remains unresolved. The law imposes transparency obligations for synthetic content—including what can be defined as deepfakes. The problem is that the operational definition of a deepfake is not unambiguous in the legislative text.

This ambiguity isn't just a minor technicality. In fact, it directly impacts millions of euros in ad spending across European retail. Companies already using AI today to whip up product images, digital sets, and virtual models are suddenly left guessing at a burning question: do we actually have to slap a label on this?

The original source of this story is an analysis published by The Decoder , which highlighted the pressure put by Eurocommerce on the European Commission. This topic is set to stay front and center throughout 2026 and likely into 2027.

The numbers reshaping retail marketing

The most significant data comes from Zalando. The e-commerce platform states that the 90% of marketing content published on their platform is already generated via artificial intelligence. This number is not an exception: it is the direction of the entire industry.

Therefore, when talking about AI Act compliance in retail, these are not edge cases. This is about the operational core of content strategies for large and medium-sized companies. Furthermore, this phenomenon does not only concern the big players. Italian retail SMEs—often operating on limited budgets—are also adopting generative tools to produce product images, banners, and campaign creatives.

According to data Gartner , by 2027 over 30% of all global marketing content will be generated by AI. Consequently, the European regulatory issue is not a future concern: it is already present in today's creative pipelines.

Eurocommerce's position: a sofa image is not a deepfake

Eurocommerce — the association representing giants like Amazon, H&M, and IKEA — has submitted a formal request to the European Commission. The goal is to obtain an explicit exemption for AI-generated images used for commercial advertising purposes.

The argument makes total sense. A virtual living room created by an AI model to show a sofa for sale doesn't fool anyone about a real person's identity. It doesn't mess with faces, twist statements, or make up fake people. Instead, it's just a digital visual merchandising tool, pretty much like a studio photo with a custom set.

However, the European Commission has not yet formally adopted this distinction. Therefore, the regulatory vacuum persists. And in the absence of clarity, corporate legal and marketing teams tend to play it safe—slowing down adoption or adding unnecessary disclaimers.

The operational gray area for marketing managers

For a marketing or digital manager of an Italian company, the problem translates into concrete questions. Do you need to include a disclosure every time you use an AI-generated image in a Google Ads campaign? Does a banner featuring a virtual model violate transparency rules? Does a product photo retouched with AI fall under the definition of synthetic content?

Right now, the answers aren't clear-cut. So, companies find themselves having to make compliance choices under uncertain conditions. This comes at a price: it slows down creative processes, increases legal workload, and in some cases leads to giving up more efficient AI solutions to avoid unquantified regulatory risks.

We at SHM Studio we observe this phenomenon directly in our work with clients. In particular, during the planning phases of google ads campaigns and the LinkedIn campaigns , the need to define an internal policy on AI-generated content increasingly emerges even before tackling the creative strategy.

Strategic reading: three possible scenarios for 2026-2027

Analyzing the evolution of the regulatory framework, it is possible to identify three plausible scenarios for the next 18 months.

• Scenario A — Commercial exemption approved: The Commission accepts Eurocommerce's request and introduces an explicit distinction between deepfakes and AI content for commercial advertising use. In this case, retail can continue scaling generative production without additional disclosure obligations.
• Scenario B — Generalized labeling obligation: The EU decides to apply a labeling obligation to all AI-generated content, regardless of the context. As a result, every generative image in an ad will need to carry an explicit disclaimer. The impact on user experience and campaign CTR could be significant.
• Scenario C — Prolonged regulatory stalemate: The Commission is not producing operational clarifications in the short term. Therefore, each Member State is interpreting things on its own, creating a regulatory patchwork that makes pan-European strategies tricky.

Scenario C is, at the moment, the most likely in the short term. According to an analysis by Harvard Business Review , companies operating in ambiguous regulatory contexts tend to overestimate compliance risks, reducing their technology adoption speed compared to competitors in markets with clearer rules.

Operational implications for content strategies

On a practical level, Italian marketing managers must face this scenario with a two-tiered strategy.

The first level concerns the internal governance of AI content . First of all, it is necessary to map which assets in your creative production are generated — even partially — by generative AI tools. This includes product images, virtual backgrounds, digital models, generated text, and synthetic videos. Afterward, it is a good idea to define a company policy that establishes when and how to disclose the use of AI in advertising content.

The second level concerns the campaign flexibility . Strategies of Digital marketing must be designed with the ability to quickly adapt creative formats in the event of new regulatory obligations. Similarly, strategies SEO based on generative content must consider the possibility of transparency requirements that impact organic positioning.

Besides this, who manages the production of Copywriting and visual content must begin documenting the creative process. This documentation could become relevant in the event of a compliance audit.

The work in progress: what is really missing from the European regulation

The core issue isn't technical: it's conceptual. The AI Act was written with a legitimate concern — protecting citizens from informational manipulation. However, the lawmakers didn't make a sharp enough distinction between identity manipulation and AI-assisted creative production.

This difference is huge. A deepfake that messes with a politician's face to make them say things they never said is a threat to democracy. An AI-generated apartment image used to sell a sofa is just visual merchandising. Treating both under the exact same rulebook just messes things up for businesses without actually helping consumers at all.

In fact, retail shoppers aren't asking to know if the living room in the photo is real or generated. They want the product to match the description. Therefore, the transparency that matters in this context is about product quality and features — not the origin of the background image.

We at SHM Studio we believe the European debate should shift towards a more precise taxonomy of AI-generated content, differentiating by purpose, context, and potential for deception. Without this distinction, the risk is slowing down marketing innovation without actually protecting anyone.

Next moves: what to watch in the coming months

For marketing managers and digital heads of Italian companies, there are some deadlines and developments to keep an eye on.

• AI Act application guidelines (second half of 2026): The European Commission is expected to issue operational guidance on the categories of content subject to transparency obligations. These documents will be crucial for campaign compliance.
• Advertising platforms positioning: Google and Meta are rolling out their own policies on AI-generated content in ads. Specifically, their technical choices might jump ahead of or bypass the European regulatory framework.
• Evolution of tools for AI for marketing: The main vendors are already integrating watermarking and metadata features for generative content. Adopting tools that support native traceability is a smart strategic move.

Those who want to delve deeper into how to integrate these considerations into their strategy digital presence or in advertising campaigns can contact our team via the contact page or explore the insights of the SHM Studio blog .