A New Signatory in the Ring
Just days after Meta publicly declined the EU’s voluntary Code of Practice for general-purpose AI, Google revealed a different approach. Alphabet President of Global Affairs Kent Walker stated Google will sign onto the full Code. Google’s commitment was confirmed in a blog post outlining both optimism and caution. The company sees the Code as essential to advancing secure and high-quality AI in Europe. However, it remains alert to risks around innovation, trade secrets, and copyright compliance.
Why Google Changed the Equation
Google joining the Code fundamentally shifts the dynamics. OpenAI and Microsoft were already on the path toward compliance. Google’s announcement underscores that corporate AI strategy is increasingly defined by regulatory alignment. Signing serves multiple purposes:
- Legal posture: Demonstrates cooperative engagement with EU policy-makers.
- Market signaling: Reassures European governments and enterprises about tool reliability and transparency.
- Influence: Provides Google a seat at the table to shape evolving interpretations of Code provisions.
At the same time, Kent Walker made clear Google will stay vocal. The Code, he cautioned, still risks chilling European innovation. This is especially true if it departs from existing copyright laws. It could also delay approvals or force disclosure of trade secrets. These concerns echo Meta’s criticisms, even as Google takes the opposite path.
A Strategic Counterbalance to Meta
Meta remains the outlier. Its refusal is led by Global Affairs Chief Joel Kaplan. This stance continues to cast the company as combative. They cite legal ambiguity and regulatory overreach in the Code’s provisions. Google’s decision now frames Meta’s stance as the minority position, leaving the company increasingly isolated in Europe’s regulatory discourse.
Meanwhile, Google strengthens the coalition of compliant signatories including OpenAI, Mistral, Anthropic, and likely Microsoft. This collective aligns with the EU’s vision—where voluntary frameworks gradually harden into de facto standards.
What Lawyers Should Take Away
Google’s endorsement of the Code refines how legal counsel should approach AI compliance:
- Reinforce the Code’s role as a regulatory baseline. Its legitimacy grows with each high-profile signatory. The act of signing also signals a commitment to EU values around safety, transparency, and copyright.
- Treat signing as a calculated choice instead of ideological surrender. Companies like Google and Microsoft are using the Code as a proactive shield. They’ve calculated that participation offers greater strategic value than resistance.
- Prepare clients for normative pressure. Non-signatories risk being judged not just on law but on alignment with peer behavior. Rejection of the Code today could look like recklessness tomorrow.
- Anticipate further law-making via practice. Google’s openness to shaping the Code post-signing shows a willingness to change. It embeds feedback loops with the EU AI Office. This demonstrates the fluid line between voluntary frameworks and enforceable rules.
Looking Ahead
The divergence between Meta and Google illustrates a deeper strategic dividing line: control and agility vs. cooperation and regulatory clarity. The AI Act’s enforcement deadline of August 2, 2025 is approaching. Phased compliance timelines will roll out through 2027. Thus, participation in the Code will matter more than ever.
Google’s sign-on signals that the regulatory tide is shifting: what began as voluntary may soon become expected. For lawyers advising AI developers or enterprise clients, the challenge is no longer theoretical. It’s about anticipating how the Code will be invoked in contracts, procurement, and litigation. Questionably, it may also be enforced in reputational risk assessments.
Leave a Reply