Which regulatory agencies enforce this type of clause?

{'agency': 'FTC', 'reason': "FTC has issued guidance on AI transparency and can pursue enforcement if Microsoft's AI systems make consequential decisions without adequate disclosure to consumers.", 'complaint_url': 'https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/'}

What is the severity of this clause?

ConductAtlas classifies this Transparency in AI clause as medium severity. Severity reflects the magnitude of rights affected, the breadth of users impacted, and the degree of discretion the platform retains.

Transparency in AI — Microsoft

Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF

What it is

Microsoft commits to making its AI systems explainable so that people can understand how AI decisions that affect them are made.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

This commitment means Microsoft aims to make its AI decision-making understandable, but under this document alone you have no legal right to demand an explanation for an AI decision affecting you — that right exists only under GDPR Art. 22 for EU users or specific product terms.

Cross-platform context

See how other platforms handle Transparency in AI and similar clauses.

Compare across platforms →

Need full compliance memos? See Professional →

Why it matters (compliance & risk perspective)

The right to understand AI decision-making is a key consumer protection — particularly for consequential decisions about credit, employment, or healthcare — and this commitment aligns with but does not substitute for legal rights to explanation under GDPR and emerging US laws.

View original clause language

Transparency: AI systems should be understandable. When AI systems are helping to inform decisions that have a major impact on people's lives, it's important that people can understand how those decisions were made.

Institutional analysis (Compliance & legal intelligence)

(1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: AI transparency obligations are legally mandated under GDPR Art. 22 (right to explanation for automated decisions with significant effects), EU AI Act Arts. 13-14 (transparency and human oversight requirements for high-risk AI, including logging and documentation obligations), CCPA/CPRA (right to know about automated decision-making), and emerging US state AI transparency laws (Colorado AI Act, Virginia CDPA). The EU AI Office, EU DPAs, and California Privacy Protection Agency are key enforcement authorities. (2)

🔒

Compliance intelligence locked

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

Watcher $9.99/mo Professional $149/mo

Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.

Applicable agencies

FTC

FTC has issued guidance on AI transparency and can pursue enforcement if Microsoft's AI systems make consequential decisions without adequate disclosure to consumers.
File a complaint →

Provision details

Document information

Document

Responsible AI

Entity

Microsoft

Document last updated

March 5, 2026

Tracking information

First tracked

April 27, 2026

Last verified

April 27, 2026

Record ID

CA-P-003113

Document ID

CA-D-00003

Evidence Provenance

Source URL

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/ai/responsible-ai#legacy

Wayback Machine

View archived versions →

SHA-256

17d4b7dd772937329cdd57fe4bced78e38fc42b1260d418279febdf8127cc1d7

Verified

✓ Snapshot stored ✓ Change verified

How to Cite

ConductAtlas Policy Archive
Entity: Microsoft | Document: Responsible AI | Record: CA-P-003113
Captured: 2026-04-27 08:55:46 UTC | SHA-256: 17d4b7dd77293732…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/microsoft/responsible-ai/transparency-in-ai/
Accessed: May 2, 2026

Classification

Severity

Medium

Transparency in AI