Artificial Intelligence Policy Tracker
Search
Menu

Prohibited practices: AI obligations

Practical requirements extracted from policy instruments, with the source article, the actors they bind, evidence examples and original framework mappings. Legal requirements are marked; everything else is voluntary guidance.

Results

5 of 117 obligations match · Download these as CSV

Legal requirement Prohibited practices Texas (United States)

Developers and deployers must not use AI to incite self-harm, harm to others or crime

Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.052

A person may not develop or deploy an AI system in a manner that intentionally aims to incite or encourage a person to commit physical self-harm, including suicide, to harm another person, or to engage in criminal activity. The prohibition turns on the developer's or deployer's intent rather than on the system's effects, which is the pattern followed throughout the Act's prohibited-use provisions.

Verified (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review) Applies from 1 Jan 2026
Legal requirement Prohibited practices Texas (United States)

Developers and deployers must not use AI with the intent to unlawfully discriminate against a protected class

Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.056

A person may not develop or deploy an AI system with the intent to unlawfully discriminate against a protected class in violation of state or federal law. A disparate impact on a protected class is not, by itself, sufficient to show an intent to discriminate, and insurers and financial institutions acting under their own regulatory regimes are treated separately.

Verified (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review) Applies from 1 Jan 2026
Legal requirement Prohibited practices Texas (United States)

Developers and distributors must not build AI intended to produce child sexual abuse material or unlawful sexual deepfakes

Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.057

A person may not develop or distribute an AI system with the sole intent of producing, assisting or aiding in producing, or distributing child pornography or unlawful deep-fake videos or images, including sexually explicit deepfakes of a person without consent, or of engaging in sexually explicit text-based conversations while impersonating or imitating a child, in violation of the Texas Penal Code.

Verified (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review) Applies from 1 Jan 2026
Legal requirement Prohibited practices Texas (United States)

Governmental entities must not use AI for biometric identification from public data without consent where it infringes rights

Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.054

A governmental entity may not develop or deploy an AI system for the purpose of uniquely identifying a specific individual using biometric data, or of gathering images or other media from the internet or another public source without the individual's consent, where doing so would infringe a right guaranteed under the United States or Texas constitutions or violate state or federal law. The Act preserves lawful uses that comply with existing biometric-privacy law.

Verified (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review) Applies from 1 Jan 2026
Legal requirement Prohibited practices Texas (United States)

Governmental entities must not use AI for social scoring

Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.053

A governmental entity may not develop or deploy an AI system that evaluates or classifies natural persons or groups on the basis of their social behaviour or personal characteristics, with the intent to calculate or assign a social score or similar valuation that leads to detrimental or unfavourable treatment unrelated to the context in which the data was collected, or that is unjustified or disproportionate to the behaviour.

Verified (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review) Applies from 1 Jan 2026

Frequently asked questions

What is an obligation on this site?

A single practical requirement pulled out of an instrument and stated on its own: keep a risk management system, log incidents, document training data, provide human oversight, and so on. Each one cites the article or section it comes from so you can check it against the source.

Does a voluntary obligation have legal force?

No, and every obligation is labelled either a legal requirement or voluntary guidance. Voluntary items still matter in practice, because procurement questionnaires and auditors ask about them, but only the binding ones carry legal consequence.

How do I find the obligations that apply to my organisation?

Filter by jurisdiction, category, actor, sector or use case. The applicability check asks a short set of questions and returns the duties that may reach you. It is an educational screen, not a legal determination, and it says so.

Why do some instruments have no obligations listed?

Because nobody has broken them out yet. Most instruments are recorded at summary level first; obligations are added jurisdiction by jurisdiction. The coverage and open-gaps pages publish exactly what is missing rather than hiding it.