The EU AI Act Didn’t Go Away. It Just Moved to 2027.

Professional woman with glasses reviewing documents at a sunlit office desk by a window, logo in corner.

Most U.S. general counsel have the same read on the EU AI Act right now: it’s delayed, so there’s time. Our Managing Director of Legal & Compliance Solutions, Claire Frazer, makes the case in a recent piece for Law.com that this read is only half right, and the half that’s wrong is the costly one.  The Omnibus package adjusted the timeline, not the destination. High-risk requirements now phase in through December 2027 and August 2028, depending on the system. But AI literacy requirements have applied since February 2025, and Article 50 transparency obligations, including disclosure and machine-readable marking of AI-generated content, already took effect in August 2026. The runway got longer. The obligations didn’t disappear.  Two assumptions are worth retiring along with it. First, EU establishment isn’t the trigger, use is. The Act can apply to any organization whose AI outputs are used in the EU, with or without a European entity involved, which means the operative question isn’t “do we operate in the EU,” but “where do our AI systems’ outputs actually land.” Second, legal AI gets no automatic pass for being a professional tool. Contract review and e-discovery aren’t exempt by category. Classification turns on the purpose and function of the specific use case, not on whether a lawyer is in the loop, which makes use-case mapping far more important than simply labeling something “legal technology.”  The piece also reframes what governance should mean in practice: risk classification against Annex III use cases, verifiable data segregation, documented human-oversight protocols, and audit-ready records of how AI outputs were validated. Claire’s sharpest point may be the simplest one: regulatory classification should be the floor of the governance conversation, not the ceiling. An organization should be able to answer how its confidential information is handled and who’s accountable for AI output, regardless of whether a given workflow technically qualifies as high-risk.  For in-house teams evaluating an ALSP partner right now, that list of questions is a useful one to borrow directly, starting with: can the partner show the risk mapping, not just describe it, and is there a named owner for AI Act compliance, or is it diffused across IT, legal, and operations in a way no one actually owns?  It’s also the foundation our Compliance Support team is built around: governance that’s operational today, not a policy document waiting for 2027.  Read Claire’s full piece on Law.com: General Counsel Are Underestimating the EU AI Act’s Timeline 

AI Made PowerPoint Faster. Should Your Consultants Be Making Slides at All?

Three colleagues stand around a laptop on a conference table, one pointing at the screen as the others discuss, in a bright office with large windows.

Legal spend management is no longer just about reviewing invoices. Inconsistent processes, unreliable data, spreadsheets, and limited financial visibility can prevent legal departments from controlling costs and demonstrating value. Strong programs combine technology with effective governance, trusted data, analytics, and accountability to give legal leaders clearer insight into spending and opportunities to improve.

The Threat Actor Playbook Has Shifted from Files to Rows 

Hands typing on a laptop with floating holographic security panels and a shield icon; Integreon logo visible in the corner.

Legal spend management is no longer just about reviewing invoices. Inconsistent processes, unreliable data, spreadsheets, and limited financial visibility can prevent legal departments from controlling costs and demonstrating value. Strong programs combine technology with effective governance, trusted data, analytics, and accountability to give legal leaders clearer insight into spending and opportunities to improve.

Why Your Marketing Team’s AI Problem Isn’t Really About AI

Woman in a pink shirt sits at a wooden desk with an open laptop, a notebook, and a stack of books, gazing to the right in a dimly lit room with a plant in the background.

Legal spend management is no longer just about reviewing invoices. Inconsistent processes, unreliable data, spreadsheets, and limited financial visibility can prevent legal departments from controlling costs and demonstrating value. Strong programs combine technology with effective governance, trusted data, analytics, and accountability to give legal leaders clearer insight into spending and opportunities to improve.

Beyond e-Billing: Turning Legal Spend Data into Better Business Decisions

Professional woman in glasses sits at a desk with a laptop, reviewing documents; article title about e-billing and spend control.

Legal spend management is no longer just about reviewing invoices. Inconsistent processes, unreliable data, spreadsheets, and limited financial visibility can prevent legal departments from controlling costs and demonstrating value. Strong programs combine technology with effective governance, trusted data, analytics, and accountability to give legal leaders clearer insight into spending and opportunities to improve.

Consero Legal Operations Forum

Banner for Consero Legal Operations Forum with the title 'Redefining Legal Delivery: Allocating the Right Work to the Right Resource' and circular speaker headshots alongside the Integreen logo.

Join us March 16 for a free webinar on proving marketing’s impact when margins are tight. Featuring a panel of senior leaders from the financial industry.

NetDiligence Cyber Risk Summit

Green CyberRisk Summit banner with skyline silhouette, bold 'PHILADELPHIA', and dates Oct 05–07, 2026.

Join us March 16 for a free webinar on proving marketing’s impact when margins are tight. Featuring a panel of senior leaders from the financial industry.