Home / Volume 8, Issue 5 / Doctrinal Gaps in the EU Artificial Intelligence Act… Open access · CC BY-NC 4.0
Research Paper Volume 8 Issue 5 163 - 172 September 18, 2025

Doctrinal Gaps in the EU Artificial Intelligence Act that Negate Effective Legal and Regulatory Oversight of Generative AI

Lead author · Corresponding
Yash Bajpai
Legal Counsel at Blancco Technology Group
Co-author
George Janssen
Group Legal Counsel at Blancco Technology Group
View PDF Full text DOIhttps://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.1110754
Abstract

This paper undertakes a critical examination of the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) with a specific focus on its doctrinal gaps that impede effective legal and regulatory oversight of generative AI. In an era characterized by the rapid evolution of AI, the imperative for a robust legal framework is paramount, one that not only ensures compliance with existing intellectual property laws but also anticipates the dynamic nature of generative AI. Unlike traditional AI, generative AI models analyze and curate existing information to produce novel content, a characteristic that introduces significant complexities for comprehensive regulation. While the AI Act introduces crucial provisions on transparency and risk management for general-purpose AI models, it notably refrains from explicitly defining ‘Generative AI.’ This omission, coupled with other significant shortcomings, creates lacunae that hinders its effective control over generative AI. Specifically, the Act fails to adequately address the determination of ownership for wholly AI-generated outputs, imposes limitations on disclosures that negatively impact oversight, and exhibits inconsistencies in regulating open-source models. Furthermore, it does not establish direct remedies for creators, thereby creating practical enforcement barriers. This paper systematically explores these limitations, including issues related to open-source exemptions, the absence of clear copyright ownership rules, and challenges in ensuring transparency and provenance. It also critically analyzes the Act’s enforcement mechanisms, highlighting the lack of mandated forensic capacity or centralized clearing mechanisms necessary for large-scale, practical enforcement. The discussion concludes by proposing concrete remedial measures and potential avenues for reform to strengthen the EU AI Act’s regulatory framework for generative AI, ensuring a more comprehensive and adaptable governance structure for this rapidly advancing technology.

Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 8, Issue 5, Page 163 - 172
DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.1110754
Creative Commons
CC BY-NC 4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © IJLMH 2026
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the author(s) alone and do not reflect the views, policies, or position of the Journal.

Export citation


        
📢 Call for Papers — Volume IX Issue III now open  ·  Impact Factor 7.010  ·  Indexed in HeinOnline, Manupatra & Google Scholar + 1000+ Libraries  ·  Free DOI Submit Now →
Chat with us