Microsoft · Microsoft Responsible AI Standard · View original document ↗

Transparency Principle

Medium severity Medium confidence Inferredfromcontext Unique · 0 of 343 platforms
Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF
Monitor governance changes for Microsoft Create a free account to receive the weekly governance digest and monitor one platform for governance changes.
Create free account No credit card required.
Document Record

What it is

Microsoft states that its AI systems should be understandable, with people having sufficient information to know when and how AI is being used and what its limitations are.

This analysis describes what Microsoft's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology

ConductAtlas Analysis

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

This principle addresses explainability and disclosure in AI systems, which is directly relevant to regulatory requirements around automated decision-making and the right to explanation under frameworks such as GDPR.

Interpretive note: The document text was not fully available for direct quotation; the principle is characterized based on publicly known content and the page's stated subject matter. Regulatory applicability depends heavily on the specific product and jurisdiction.

Clause Stability Stable

0
Changes
3
Months Monitored
Apr 4, 2026
First Seen
May 22, 2026
Last Seen
This clause type exists across 3350 other provisions on other platforms.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

This is a stated design principle; it does not independently establish a right to explanation for consumers subject to automated decisions in Microsoft AI products. Applicable legal rights to explanation depend on the specific product, jurisdiction, and regulatory framework governing the use case.

How other platforms handle this

Ledger Medium

At Ledger, earning and maintaining our users' trust is a top priority. That's why we are deeply committed not only to protecting your privacy and securing your personal data, but also to being fully transparent about how we handle it.

Garmin Medium

If you are located in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, or the United Kingdom, you have the right to access, correct, or erase your personal data; the right to restrict or object to our processing of your personal data; the right to data portability; and, where our processing is based on your...

Strava Medium

We may display advertisements on our Services and those advertisements may be targeted to your interests based on your personal information. We may share your personal information with advertising partners for interest-based advertising purposes. You may opt out of interest-based advertising by visi...

See all platforms with this clause type →

Monitoring

Microsoft has changed this document before.

Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.

Start Monitor free trial Or create a free account →
ConductAtlas Analysis

Institutional analysis (Compliance & governance intelligence)

(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Transparency obligations for automated decision-making are addressed under GDPR Article 22 and Recital 71, which provide rights related to automated decisions with significant effects. The EU AI Act imposes transparency requirements for certain AI system categories. This policy statement does not satisfy the specific disclosure obligations under these frameworks. The FTC has also issued guidance on transparency in AI-driven commercial practices. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium for organizations deploying Microsoft AI in automated decision-making contexts that trigger GDPR Article 22 or EU AI Act transparency requirements, because reliance on this policy statement rather than product-level disclosures and consent mechanisms would be insufficient. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU/EEA deployments involving automated decisions with legal or significant effects create the highest exposure. US states with algorithmic transparency legislation also create heightened exposure for certain use cases. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise customers should verify that Microsoft's product-level documentation supports the transparency disclosures required by applicable law, and that data processing agreements address automated decision-making requirements. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Organizations subject to GDPR Article 22 should conduct a separate assessment of whether their use of Microsoft AI products requires a data protection impact assessment and appropriate transparency notices to affected individuals.

Full compliance analysis

Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.

Track 1 platform — free Try Monitor free for 14 days

Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.

Applicable agencies

  • FTC
    The FTC has enforcement authority over transparency and disclosure obligations in AI-driven commercial products and services.
    File a complaint →

Applicable regulations

EU AI Act
European Union
BIPA
Illinois, USA
CCPA/CPRA
California, USA
Colorado AI Act
US-CO
Connecticut Data Privacy Act Amendments
US-CT
CAN-SPAM
United States Federal
FTC Act Section 5
United States Federal
GDPR
European Union
Indiana Consumer Data Protection Act
US-IN
Kentucky Consumer Data Protection Act
US-KY
TCPA
United States Federal
UK GDPR
United Kingdom
Universal Opt-Out Mechanism Expansion 2026
US
VPPA
United States Federal

Provision details

Document information
Document
Microsoft Responsible AI Standard
Entity
Microsoft
Document last updated
May 12, 2026
Tracking information
First tracked
April 27, 2026
Last verified
May 12, 2026
Record ID
CA-P-002087
Document ID
CA-D-00019
Evidence Provenance
Source URL
Wayback Machine
Content hash (SHA-256)
77bc43a7f84410902fdbac1b71574e6a146d5315f383cd6ee7ecdd0ee54cd259
Analysis generated
April 27, 2026 09:59 UTC
Methodology
Evidence
✓ Snapshot stored   ✓ Hash verified
Citation Record
Entity: Microsoft
Document: Microsoft Responsible AI Standard
Record ID: CA-P-002087
Captured: 2026-04-27 09:59:26 UTC
SHA-256: 77bc43a7f8441090…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/microsoft/microsoft-responsible-ai-standard/transparency-principle/
Accessed: June 28, 2026
Permanent archival reference. Stable identifier suitable for legal filings, compliance documentation, and research citation.
Classification
Severity
Medium
Categories

Other risks in this policy

Related Analysis

Compliance Governance Intelligence

Need to monitor specific governance provisions?

Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.

Arbitration clauses AI governance Data rights Indemnification Retention policies
Start Compliance free trial

Or start with Monitor →

Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Microsoft's Transparency Principle clause do?

This principle addresses explainability and disclosure in AI systems, which is directly relevant to regulatory requirements around automated decision-making and the right to explanation under frameworks such as GDPR.

How does this clause affect you?

This is a stated design principle; it does not independently establish a right to explanation for consumers subject to automated decisions in Microsoft AI products. Applicable legal rights to explanation depend on the specific product, jurisdiction, and regulatory framework governing the use case.

Is ConductAtlas affiliated with Microsoft?

No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Microsoft.