Understand your AI Act obligations.
Prove compliance.
Keep it aligned as AI evolves.

A practical compliance platform for companies deploying AI in the EU and the consultants who support them. Built around real deployments, not abstract models.

Join 300+ professionals already exploring AI Act compliance with Aigolex

The real AI Act problem

Companies don't know if they are AI providers, deployers, or both.

Obligations depend on how AI is used, not on the model itself.

Documentation becomes outdated as soon as systems or vendors change.

Audits, enterprise customers, and boards expect immediate answers.

AI Act compliance is not a one-time exercise.
It's an operational problem.

Compliance attaches to deployments, not to AI models

That's why the platform mirrors the structure of the AI Act itself

Company

the legal entity ultimately responsible for compliance

Workspaces

distinct operational perimeters where AI is developed, tested, or used

AI assets

the underlying AI systems or models, independent from any single feature

Deployments

how those AI assets are actually used in practice, by whom, and for what purpose

Under the AI Act, obligations, risk classification, and roles attach to deployments not to AI models in isolation. This ensures compliance decisions reflect real-world AI use, not theoretical system descriptions.

Scope

Define where AI exists, how it's used, and who is responsible.

•Maps AI usage across companies and workspaces
•Identifies AI assets and their concrete deployments
•Determines your role under the AI Act (provider, deployer, or both)

Misclassifying your role means misapplying every obligation that follows.

Obligations

Know exactly what the AI Act requires, per deployment.

•Assigns regulatory requirements at the deployment level
•Based on role, risk classification, and usage context
•Generates clear, trackable checklists
•Separates applicable obligations from irrelevant ones

The AI Act is obligation-driven. Guessing is not a strategy.

Evidence

Always-ready documentation to prove compliance.

•Centralizes compliance documentation per workspace and deployment
•Includes system descriptions and risk assessments
•Tracks human oversight measures and monitoring controls

Static documents fail the moment reality changes.

Continuity

Stay compliant as AI systems, vendors, and uses change.

•Monitors changes to AI assets, deployments, and operational perimeters
•Flags when obligations or risk levels must be updated
•Alerts when documentation needs to be refreshed

Most compliance failures happen after the first assessment.

AI Act compliance readiness assessment

Identify your AI Act obligations, classify risk exposure, and uncover compliance gaps — with a guided interactive assessment.

Built for teams that can't ignore regulation

EU-based or EU-operating

Active AI deployments

Exposure to audits

Legal & compliance leaders

Risk & trust teams

Engineering leaders accountable for AI systems

Built by people who've done this before

Experience in legaltech and regulated environments

Built with legal and technical teams

Not Big-4 complexity

Prepare now. Don't scramble later.

AI Act

Which artificial intelligence systems are banned by the AI Act

Aigolex Team15 March 2026

Introduction

Within the regulatory model introduced by the European regulation on artificial intelligence, there is a category of completely prohibited systems.

These are applications classified as unacceptable risk.

According to the Artificial Intelligence Act, these systems present such a high level of risk to people's fundamental rights that it cannot be mitigated through simple technical or procedural requirements.

For this reason, the European legislator has chosen to directly prohibit their use.

What is meant by unacceptable risk

An AI system is considered to be at unacceptable risk when its use can compromise fundamental rights, individual freedoms or democratic principles.

In these cases, the regulation does not introduce compliance obligations or additional controls.

The use of such systems is simply prohibited within the European Union, except for some very limited exceptions provided for specific contexts.

Some examples of prohibited practices

Among the prohibited applications we find various practices considered particularly invasive or manipulative.

For example:

systems designed to manipulate people's behavior by exploiting psychological vulnerabilities

social scoring systems that classify citizens based on their behavior or personal characteristics

some forms of real-time biometric identification in public spaces.

These technologies are considered incompatible with the protection of fundamental rights and with the principles of a democratic society.

Conclusion

The prohibitions provided by the AI Act represent the highest level of protection introduced by the regulation.

By clearly defining which applications are not acceptable, the European Union establishes the limits within which the development and use of artificial intelligence can take place responsibly.

Understand your AI Act obligations.Prove compliance.Keep it aligned as AI evolves.