european union

On July 20, 2026, the French data protection authority (the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés, “CNIL”) published a joint exploratory note with the French AI and Digital Council (“CIANum”) on the data protection implications of agentic AI (the “Note”). The Note is exploratory rather than prescriptive: it does not purport to state definitive regulatory expectations, and it does not announce forthcoming guidance. However, it does provide helpful considerations for when the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) might come under strain in the course of processing personal data via autonomous systems, and identifies legal and technical measures that might help mitigate potential risks. The CNIL frames this exercise as connected to its engagement with several international counterparts, including through the G7 data protection authorities during the French G7 presidency.

The Note is the latest in a rapidly accumulating body of regulator commentary on agentic AI, including by the UK ICO, Spanish AEPD, and Singaporean IMDA. Below are some key takeaways.

Continue Reading French CNIL Publishes Note on Agentic AI and Data Protection

On 3 June 2026, the European Commission (“Commission“) published its proposal for a Regulation establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s cloud and AI ecosystem—the Cloud and AI Development Act (“CADA Proposal“). The CADA Proposal sits at the heart of the Commission’s broader Tech Sovereignty Package (which we describe at…

Continue Reading The EU Cloud and AI Development Act in Depth

On May 28, 2026, the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (“ENISA”) published the third edition of its NIS360 report, an annual benchmarking tool that assesses the cybersecurity maturity of entities in the sectors set out in Annex I of the NIS2 Directive (which includes certain entities in the energy, transport, healthcare, digital…

Continue Reading ENISA’s NIS360 2026 report highlights both the criticality of the European space sector, and flags a persistent cybersecurity maturity gap

On 19 May 2026, the European Commission published its long-awaited draft, non-binding guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems (“HRAIs”) under the EU AI Act (the “Guidelines”). Across three documents—covering general principles, high-risk classification in the context of regulated products (Annex I), and high-risk use cases (Annex III)—the Commission sets out its approach to one of the AI Act’s central questions: when does an AI system fall within the high-risk regime (and, just as importantly, when does it not)?

Continue Reading EU AI Act Update: The European Commission Publishes Draft Guidelines on HRAIs

On June 3, the European Commission published its Tech Sovereignty Package, a set of legislative and policy initiatives designed to address what the Commission characterizes as Europe’s technological dependencies on non-European suppliers. The Package marks a further step in the evolution of the EU’s technology policy, with initiatives spanning the full tech stack—from chips and infrastructure to software, cloud, and artificial intelligence. Through this “ecosystem” approach, the Commission seeks to reduce supply-side dependencies by strengthening domestic capabilities in Europe and stimulating demand in downstream sectors.

The Package comprises four components: two legislative proposals—(i) the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA), and (ii) the Chips Act 2.0—as well as two non-legislative initiatives—(iii) the EU Open Source Strategy and (iv) a Strategic Roadmap for Digitalisation and AI in Energy.

This blog post provides an initial, high-level overview of the four initiatives through which the Commission seeks to advance a “European way” to tech sovereignty, with potential implications for industrial ecosystems in Europe and beyond, including cloud, telecoms, automotive, aeronautics, and defense sectors.

Continue Reading EU Tech Sovereignty Package
On 19 March 2026, Advocate-General Capeta issued an opinion in the case of Elisa Eesti AS v Estonian Government Security Committee (C-354/24). This case concerned, among other things, whether a 2022 order from the Estonian Government for Elisa Eesti AS—a 5G network operator—to remove Huawei components from its network for national security reasons was subject to EU law, constituted a lawful restriction on the right to offer an electronic communications network, and amounted to a “deprivation of property” requiring compensation. AG Capeta concluded that the relevant Estonian regime was within scope of EU law—specifically the European Electronic Communications Code (“EECC”)—even though that regime allowed for the imposition of orders on electronic communications network (“ECN”) providers for national security reasons. She also concluded that the requirement to obtain prior authorization from the Estonian government for use of network equipment constituted a restriction on the freedom to provide an ECN, but that this could be justified on national security grounds if the decision was based on a genuine risk assessment that meets the requirements for proportionality under EU law. She stated that this determination should be left to the referring court. Finally, she concluded that the Estonian Government’s order did not amount to a “deprivation” of property for which compensation would be required, as it was instead a mere “restriction” on the use of property. Below, we describe these non-binding conclusions in more detail. The Court’s final ruling in this case will have significant implications for the European Commission’s proposed revisions to the EU Cybersecurity Act, which as drafted would—among other things—allow the Commission to require ECN providers to remove and cease using components from designated high-risk jurisdictions in their networks. See our prior blog post on the proposal for a revised Cybersecurity Act here. … Continue Reading CJEU Advocate-General indicates that communications network operators can lawfully be required to remove Chinese components, and that compensation is not required

In June 2025, the European Parliament (“EP”) published its draft report on “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges” (available here). The draft report calls on the European Commission to make a series of changes to the way that copyright is protected in the age of generative AI (“GenAI”). The EP notes the challenges in finding a balance between respecting existing laws and protecting the rights of content creators on the one hand, while not hindering the development of AI technologies in the European Union on the other. In its report, the EP focuses on the perceived copyright-related risks posed at the GenAI training stage and the GenAI output stage.

Continue Reading European Parliament Proposes Changes to Copyright Protection in the Age of Generative AI

On February 20, 2025, the European Commission’s AI Office held a webinar explaining the AI literacy obligation under Article 4 of the EU’s AI Act.  This obligation started to apply on February 2, 2025.  At this webinar, the Commission highlighted the recently published repository of AI literacy practices.  This repository compiles the practices that some AI Pact companies have adopted to ensure a sufficient level of AI literacy in their workforce.  

Continue Reading European Commission Provides Guidance on AI Literacy Requirement under the EU AI Act

On August 22, 2023, the Spanish Council of Ministers approved the Statute of the Spanish Agency for the Supervision of Artificial Intelligence (“AESIA”) thus creating the first AI regulatory body in the EU. The AESIA will start operating from December 2023, in anticipation of the upcoming EU AI Act  (for a summary of the AI Act, see our EMEA Tech Regulation Toolkit). In line with its National Artificial Intelligence Strategy, Spain has been playing an active role in the development of AI initiatives, including a pilot for the EU’s first AI Regulatory Sandbox and guidelines on AI transparency.

Continue Reading Spain Creates AI Regulator to Enforce the AI Act

On 9 October 2023, the European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) and Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) agreed revised wording to amend the European Commission’s (the “EC”) proposed new Product Liability Directive (the “Directive”). The vote was passed with 33 votes in favour to 2 against. If adopted, the Directive will replace the existing (almost 40-year old) Directive 85/374/EEC on Liability for Defective Products, which imposes a form of strict liability on product manufacturers for harm caused by their defective products.

Continue Reading EU Legislative Update on the New Product Liability Directive