Droit contraignant · UE · Applicable le 2 août 2026
Checklist de conformité — article 50
L'article 50 crée des obligations de transparence pour les fournisseurs et les déployeurs de certains systèmes d'IA. Parcourez les contrôles ci-dessous par rôle, cochez ce qui est fait, et conservez les preuves produites par chaque contrôle.
Contenu vérifié le 2026-08-03
Outil purement indicatif — pas un conseil juridique
Cet outil synthétise des documents officiels de l'UE à des fins d'information. Il ne constitue pas un conseil juridique, le compléter n'établit pas votre conformité, et les situations limites dépendent des faits propres à chaque cas. Faites examiner votre situation par un avocat.
L'AI Omnibus n'a pas reporté l'article 50
L'AI Omnibus a reporté le régime « haut risque » — systèmes de l'annexe III au 2 décembre 2027 et de l'annexe I au 2 août 2028 — mais il n'a pas reporté l'article 50. Les obligations de transparence s'appliquent bien depuis le 2 août 2026. L'Omnibus a en revanche modifié l'article 50(2), en y ajoutant la transition limitée au 2 décembre 2026 ci-dessous.
Ce que coûte le non-respect
Jusqu'à 15 millions d'euros ou 3 % du chiffre d'affaires mondial annuel
- Pour les entreprises, le plafond applicable est le plus élevé des deux montants.
- Pour les PME et les jeunes pousses, l'article 99(6) inverse le calcul : le plafond est le plus bas des deux montants.
- Pour les institutions, organes et organismes de l'UE, la fiche officielle de la Commission indique des amendes pouvant atteindre 750 000 € ; le CEPD est l'autorité compétente.
- L'application est décentralisée — les autorités nationales de surveillance du marché traitent l'article 50 en première ligne.
Comment utiliser cette checklist
Commencez par les contrôles juridiques : la première question n'est pas « utilisons-nous de l'IA ? » mais quelles entités sont fournisseurs, lesquelles sont déployeurs, et quels résultats atteignent directement des personnes. Une même société est souvent les deux.
Filtrez par rôle pour donner à chaque équipe sa propre liste de travail. Votre progression est enregistrée dans ce navigateur uniquement — rien n'est transmis ni stocké sur un serveur.
L'article 50 ne remplace pas le RGPD. Pour la reconnaissance des émotions et la catégorisation biométrique, l'information est nécessaire mais pas suffisante : une base légale, et le cas échéant une AIPD, restent requises.
Étape 1 · Triage par situation
Quelles obligations s'appliquent à vous ?
Cochez chaque affirmation qui décrit votre organisation. Les obligations applicables s'affichent en dessous, avec les groupes de la checklist à traiter.
Ce qui s'applique à vous
Rien de sélectionné pour l'instant — cochez les situations ci-dessus pour voir les obligations applicables.
Correspondance purement indicative — pas un conseil juridique. Les situations limites dépendent des faits et relèvent d'un avocat.
Étape 2 · Contrôles
Déroulez les contrôles
Applicable à partir du
2 août 2026
Marquage art. 50(2) — systèmes existants
2 décembre 2026
Uniquement pour l'obligation de marquage de l'art. 50(2), et seulement pour les systèmes mis sur le marché avant le 2 août 2026.
0 sur 18 contrôles cochés
0%
- Legal & compliance· ScopeHaute
Complete Article 50 scoping and role allocation
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Determine where the company is a provider, a deployer, or both. The fastest triage question is not “Do we use AI?” but which business units are providers, which are deployers, and which outputs reach people directly.
Actions
- Build a use-case register covering every AI system that reaches people.
- Assign a provider or deployer role per workflow.
- Identify EU-facing outputs, including non-EU products whose outputs are used in the Union.
- Set a RACI by business unit.
Responsables
Legal · Compliance · AI governance · Procurement
Preuves à conserver
Use-case inventory · RACI matrix · Territorial-scope memo · Board or steering-pack excerpt
- Legal & compliance· Art. 50(2), (4), (5)Haute
Decide on the Code of Practice strategy
Échéance: Within days
Pourquoi
Choose the simplest evidence model. The Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content is voluntary, but the Commission and the AI Board have assessed it as an adequate method for demonstrating compliance with the marking and labelling duties.
Actions
- Determine whether to sign the Code for the relevant provider and/or deployer functions.
- If not signing, define the “alternative adequate means” evidence package — non-signatories remain free to comply otherwise but should expect to prove adequacy more directly.
Responsables
Legal · Compliance · Executive sponsor
Preuves à conserver
Signatory decision memo · Code adherence plan · Evidence index for the non-signatory alternative
- Legal & compliance· EvidenceHaute
Create an Article 50 evidence file
Échéance: Immediate and ongoing
Pourquoi
Prepare for regulator requests and internal audit. Enforcement is decentralised: national market surveillance authorities will mainly enforce Article 50.
Actions
- Centralise screenshots, scripts, metadata specs, exception decisions, accessibility reviews, vendor attestations, and publication review records.
- Retain dated copies of control changes made before 2 August, and before 2 December for eligible legacy systems.
Responsables
Compliance · Internal audit · Records management
Preuves à conserver
Evidence register · Retention policy · Control-owner certifications
- Providers· Art. 50(1)Haute
Enable direct-interaction disclosure by design
Échéance: Immediate — complete before 2 Aug 2026
Pourquoi
Systems intended to interact directly with natural persons must be designed so people are informed they are interacting with AI, before market placement or service launch.
Actions
- Identify all systems that directly converse with natural persons.
- Decide whether any “obvious interaction” position is defensible — the Commission says this exception should be interpreted restrictively.
- Implement a default greeting, banner, or voice disclosure in every channel and locale.
- Confirm accessibility support.
Responsables
Product owner · Legal · UX · Engineering
Preuves à conserver
Scope memo · Screenshots · Voice prompt scripts · Accessibility review · Decision log on any “obvious” exception
- Providers· Art. 50(2)Haute
Implement machine-readable provenance or marking
Échéance: Immediate for live systems; eligible legacy systems by 2 Dec 2026
Pourquoi
Synthetic audio, image, video, or text outputs must be machine-readable and detectable as artificially generated or manipulated. Solutions should be effective, interoperable, robust, and reliable so far as technically feasible.
Actions
- Turn on automated marking for synthetic text, image, audio, and video where in scope.
- Document technical feasibility limits by modality.
- Test detectability after export, compression, API delivery, and platform upload.
Responsables
Engineering · ML platform · Security · Legal
Preuves à conserver
Technical spec · Test logs · Sample marked files · Detectability results · Limitation register
- Providers· Art. 50(2)Haute
Separate in-scope from out-of-scope outputs
Échéance: Immediate; refresh monthly
Pourquoi
Avoid over-labelling some content while missing others. Source code, short symbol strings, machine-to-machine outputs and some closed-loop industrial outputs fall outside the marking duty.
Actions
- Classify source code, short strings, machine-to-machine outputs, draft industrial outputs, standard-editing functions, and final consumer-facing outputs.
- Document why any output is treated as outside Article 50(2).
Responsables
Legal · ML governance · Platform engineering
Preuves à conserver
Output classification matrix · Exception rationale · Owner sign-off
- Deployers· Art. 50(4)Haute
Turn on deepfake labelling
Échéance: Immediate — complete before 2 Aug 2026
Pourquoi
Image, audio, or video content constituting a deepfake must be disclosed as artificially generated or manipulated. Visible or audible disclosure is required — machine-readable marks alone are not enough.
Actions
- Identify deepfake use cases across ads, training, customer support, social media, entertainment, investor and brand content.
- Place visible or audible notices at first exposure.
- Do not rely solely on provider metadata.
Responsables
Content operations · Marketing · Legal · Web/app ops
Preuves à conserver
Label screenshots · Player overlays · Audio scripts · Publishing SOP · Sample outputs
- Deployers· Art. 50(4)Haute
Label public-interest text, or control the review exemption
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
AI-generated or manipulated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest must be disclosed, unless it underwent substantive human review and a person holds editorial responsibility. Spell-checking or grammar checks are not enough.
Actions
- Flag content involving politics, public health, law, justice, security, environment, consumer safety, or major economic, scientific and cultural debate. The Regulation says only “matters of public interest” — this list comes from the Commission guidelines and is illustrative, not exhaustive. A topic outside it is not automatically outside scope.
- Either label it, or route it through a substantive human review and editorial responsibility workflow.
Responsables
Editorial · Public affairs · Legal · Communications
Preuves à conserver
Review checklist · Editor approval record · Publication attestation · Labelled examples
- Deployers· Art. 50(3)Haute
Implement emotion-recognition and biometric exposure notices
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
People exposed to an emotion recognition or biometric categorisation system must be informed it is operating. Article 50(3) also expressly requires personal data to be processed in accordance with the GDPR — a notice is necessary but not sufficient.
Actions
- Map kiosks, surveillance systems, workplace analytics, access control, fraud tools, and customer analytics using such functions.
- Post notices at first exposure.
- Align with the privacy notice and the lawful-basis analysis; assess whether a DPIA or DPO involvement is required.
Responsables
Operations · Privacy · Facilities · Security · HR · Product
Preuves à conserver
Notice text · Placement photos · Privacy assessment · Data-flow map
- Product & engineering· Art. 50(5)Haute
Ensure notices appear at first interaction or first exposure
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
The required information must be provided no later than the first interaction or exposure.
Actions
- Add notices to the first screen, first chat turn, first audio prompt, first playback segment, article header, or equivalent.
- Verify across web, mobile, API wrappers, embedded widgets, and third-party distribution channels.
Responsables
Engineering · UX · QA
Preuves à conserver
Regression tests · Screenshots · Video captures · Release notes
- Product & engineering· Art. 50(5)Haute
Make notices and labels accessible and perceivable
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Information must be clear, distinguishable, and accessible — which also aligns with the GDPR transparency standard.
Actions
- Use readable contrast, screen-reader labels, captions, alt text, and audible disclosure where needed.
- Test with assistive technologies.
- Localise the wording.
Responsables
UX · Accessibility · Engineering · Localization
Preuves à conserver
Accessibility issue log · WCAG-aligned review notes · Translated strings
- Product & engineering· Art. 50(2)Haute
Preserve and verify metadata through the pipeline
Échéance: Critical fixes before 2 Aug 2026; eligible legacy fixes before 2 Dec 2026
Pourquoi
Provider-side marking is only meaningful if it survives delivery. Many pipelines silently strip provenance information.
Actions
- Test whether the CDN, CMS, DAM, social tools, image processors, and transcoders strip marks.
- Log failures.
- Implement preservation rules, or fallback visible labelling.
Responsables
Platform engineering · CMS team · Security
Preuves à conserver
Preservation test matrix · Defect tickets · Remediation plan
- Communications & editorial· Art. 50(4)Haute
Build a meaningful human-review workflow for public-interest text
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Use the exemption only where it is genuinely available. Review must be substantive, and someone must hold editorial responsibility.
Actions
- Require subject-matter review by someone with relevant knowledge.
- Give the reviewer authority to approve, alter, or reject on substantive grounds.
- Never leave “editorial responsibility” undefined.
Responsables
Editorial · Legal · Public policy · Communications
Preuves à conserver
Human-review checklist · Named reviewer log · Editorial-responsibility designation
- Communications & editorial· Art. 50(5)Moyenne
Standardise label placement and icon usage
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Make disclosures understandable and consistent across channels.
Actions
- Adopt a style rule for where labels appear on articles, videos, audio players, social posts, and campaign assets.
- The Commission provides three optional EU icons for labelling AI-generated content. Use them where helpful, but pair an icon with plain-language text as the safer default unless usability testing shows icon-only disclosure is clearly understood.
Responsables
Brand · Communications · UX · Legal
Preuves à conserver
Style guide · Creative templates · Approval examples · Usability notes
- Communications & editorial· Art. 50(4)Moyenne
Handle artistic, satirical and fictional content separately
Échéance: Before publication of each asset
Pourquoi
For evidently artistic, creative, satirical or fictional works, disclosure may be given in a way that does not hamper enjoyment of the work — but the allowance should not be over-claimed.
Actions
- For films, satire, fiction and analogous works, decide how disclosure can appear without harming enjoyment.
- Document why the chosen presentation is appropriate.
Responsables
Editorial · Production · Legal
Preuves à conserver
Exception memo · Example assets · Content classification log
- Vendors & procurement· RolesHaute
Allocate Article 50 duties contractually
Échéance: Immediate for top-risk vendors
Pourquoi
Prevent responsibility gaps between provider and deployer functions.
Actions
- Amend contracts to state who supplies machine-readable marking, who displays user-facing labels, who preserves marks, and who responds to regulator inquiries.
Responsables
Procurement · Legal · Vendor management
Preuves à conserver
Contract addenda · Clause library · Vendor responsibility matrix
- Vendors & procurement· Art. 50(2)Haute
Obtain vendor evidence on marking capabilities and limits
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Prove technical feasibility efforts and preserve escalation rights.
Actions
- Request documentation on the marking method, supported formats, detectability limits, known metadata-stripping risks, and rollout timing for legacy systems.
Responsables
Procurement · Engineering · Legal
Preuves à conserver
Vendor questionnaire · Attestations · Technical whitepaper or support tickets
- Vendors & procurement· Art. 50(3)Haute
Align privacy terms for biometric or emotion systems
Échéance: Immediate
Pourquoi
Reduce GDPR exposure where Article 50(3) applies.
Actions
- Confirm controller and processor roles, lawful-basis support, subprocessor use, retention, data-minimisation controls, security, audit rights, and DPO or DPIA support commitments.
Responsables
Privacy · Legal · Procurement · Security
Preuves à conserver
DPA · Transfer assessment if relevant · DPIA input from vendor · Security annex
Exemples de mentions
L'article 50 n'impose pas de formulation précise : l'information doit être claire, distinguable, accessible et fournie au plus tard lors de la première interaction ou exposition. Ces exemples sont illustratifs, rédigés d'après le standard légal et non repris d'un modèle officiel de l'UE.
Direct AI interaction
“You are interacting with an AI system.”
Shortest defensible version for chat, voice, kiosk, or avatar experiences. Use at the start of the interaction.
Direct AI interaction, with escalation
“You are interacting with our AI assistant. A human can review or take over where available.”
The second sentence is optional but often good UX. The first sentence carries the Article 50 function.
Emotion recognition or biometric categorisation
“This service uses AI-based emotion recognition or biometric categorisation during operation.”
Article 50(3) does not itself require the purpose to be stated, but a GDPR privacy notice may require broader information.
Deepfake video or audio
“This content has been artificially generated or manipulated using AI.”
Put it on the player, opening frame, caption, or audible introduction. Do not rely only on hidden metadata.
AI-generated public-interest text
“This text was generated or manipulated using AI and was not subject to human editorial review.”
Use where the human-review exemption is not met.
Voluntary disclosure for exempt text
“This publication used AI assistance and was reviewed by human editors.”
Not legally required where the exemption applies. Many organisations still use it as a trust measure — a policy choice, not an Article 50 mandate.
Étape 3 · Cas limites
Bibliothèque de scénarios
Vingt situations concrètes — y compris les cas limites qui piègent les équipes : systèmes existants, salariés, entités hors UE, œuvres artistiques, textes internes, usages répressifs. Chaque fiche indique ce qui s'applique et les pièges fréquents.
Provider situations
Customer-facing chatbot or voice assistant
You build or offer a system intended to interact directly with natural persons.
Ce qui s'applique
- Art. 50(1): design the disclosure into the system before market placement — default greeting, banner or voice prompt, in every channel and locale.
- Disclosure at the latest at the first interaction.
Pièges fréquents
- The “obvious AI interaction” exception is interpreted restrictively — document any reliance on it.
- A disclosure that exists in one channel but not in an embedded widget or API wrapper is a gap.
Provider situations
Generative AI product — image, audio, video or text
Your system produces synthetic content within Article 50(2).
Ce qui s'applique
- Machine-readable marking, detectable as artificially generated or manipulated.
- Solutions effective, interoperable, robust and reliable so far as technically feasible — document feasibility limits by modality.
Pièges fréquents
- Marks that do not survive export, compression, API delivery or platform upload.
- Relying on marking alone where a deployer also needs a visible disclosure.
Provider situations
Assistive or standard-editing features only
Your AI feature retouches, corrects or adjusts content without substantially altering the input.
Ce qui s'applique
- No marking duty where the input is not substantially altered (standard-editing exception).
Pièges fréquents
- The line between “standard editing” and generation is factual — document the analysis per feature, and revisit when features gain generative capability.
Provider situations
System placed on the market before 2 August 2026
An in-scope system predates the application date.
Ce qui s'applique
- Transition until 2 December 2026 — but only for the Art. 50(2) machine-readable marking duty.
- All other Article 50 duties apply from 2 August 2026.
Pièges fréquents
- Treating the grace period as a general postponement — it is not.
- Systems placed on the market on or after 2 August 2026 get no transition at all.
Provider situations
B2B, machine-to-machine or closed-loop industrial outputs
Outputs are source code, short symbol strings, machine-to-machine data, or non-final industrial outputs.
Ce qui s'applique
- These can fall outside the Art. 50(2) marking duty; the guidelines also describe a narrow B2B or industrial exemption under stated conditions.
Pièges fréquents
- The exemption is narrow and conditional — keep a documented rationale per output type, signed off by an owner.
- An “industrial” output that later reaches consumers re-enters scope.
Provider situations
Non-EU provider with users in the Union
You have no EU establishment, but your system's outputs are used in the EU.
Ce qui s'applique
- Article 2 scope: non-EU providers and deployers can still be in scope where outputs are used in the Union.
Pièges fréquents
- Assuming geography alone puts you out of scope — map where outputs actually land, not where servers sit.
Deployer situations
Vendor chatbot embedded on your site or app
You deploy a third-party conversational system under your authority.
Ce qui s'applique
- The provider builds the disclosure; you need operational controls so it actually appears in use — in your theme, your locales, your channels.
Pièges fréquents
- A custom skin or integration that hides the provider's disclosure.
- No contractual clarity on who answers a regulator's question.
Deployer situations
Deepfake in marketing, training or entertainment content
You publish AI-generated or manipulated image, audio or video that appears real.
Ce qui s'applique
- Art. 50(4): visible or audible disclosure at first exposure — player overlay, opening frame, caption or audible introduction.
Pièges fréquents
- Relying on the provider's hidden metadata alone — it does not satisfy the visible-disclosure duty.
- Labels that disappear when content is downloaded, shared, embedded or reposted.
Deployer situations
Evidently artistic, satirical or fictional work
The deepfake is part of a film, satire, fiction or analogous work.
Ce qui s'applique
- Disclosure may be given in a way that does not hamper enjoyment of the work.
Pièges fréquents
- Over-claiming the allowance for content that is not evidently artistic — classify and document each asset.
Deployer situations
AI-drafted articles on public-interest topics
You publish AI-generated text informing the public on politics, health, law, justice, security, environment, consumer safety or major public debate.
Ce qui s'applique
- Label the text — or run it through substantive human review with a person holding editorial responsibility.
Pièges fréquents
- Spell-checking or grammar passes do not qualify as substantive review.
- “Editorial responsibility” left undefined — name the person.
Deployer situations
Internal-only AI text, never published
AI drafts internal reports, memos or emails that are not published to inform the public.
Ce qui s'applique
- The Art. 50(4) text duty targets text published to inform the public on matters of public interest — purely internal documents are generally outside it.
Pièges fréquents
- Internal content that later gets published — build the labelling check into the publication step, not the drafting step.
Deployer situations
Emotion recognition in HR, sales or support
Workplace analytics, interview tools or call-centre systems infer emotions.
Ce qui s'applique
- Art. 50(3): inform exposed persons the system is operating, at first exposure.
- GDPR in parallel: lawful basis, transparency, and likely a DPIA — a notice alone is not compliance.
Pièges fréquents
- Forgetting that other AI Act chapters (including high-risk duties) may apply on top of Article 50.
Deployer situations
Biometric categorisation in physical spaces
Kiosks, retail analytics or CCTV-linked systems categorise people on biometric data.
Ce qui s'applique
- Art. 50(3) notice at first exposure — posted where people actually see it.
- Large-scale monitoring of publicly accessible areas is a typical DPIA trigger under the GDPR.
Pièges fréquents
- A notice hidden in a privacy policy no one sees before exposure.
Deployer situations
Content created before 2 August 2026
Your archives contain AI-generated content from before the application date.
Ce qui s'applique
- No retroactive labelling is required; the Commission encourages voluntary labelling where feasible.
Pièges fréquents
- Re-publishing or re-cutting old content after 2 August 2026 — treat that as a new publication decision.
Special cases
You are both provider and deployer
One business unit ships an AI product; another uses third-party AI tools.
Ce qui s'applique
- Allocate the role per use case in a single register, and assign each Article 50 duty accordingly.
Pièges fréquents
- Duties falling into the gap between two teams that each assume the other owns them.
Special cases
Employees using AI tools at work
Staff use AI systems in the course of their job.
Ce qui s'applique
- Employees acting under the authority and control of a legal entity are generally not separate deployers — the company holds the duties.
Pièges fréquents
- Shadow AI: tools adopted by teams without appearing in the company's use-case register.
Special cases
EU institutions, bodies and agencies
The provider or deployer is an EU institution.
Ce qui s'applique
- The European Data Protection Supervisor is the competent authority; the Commission fact page notes fines up to €750,000.
Special cases
SMEs and start-ups
You are a small company with limited compliance resources.
Ce qui s'applique
- The duties are identical — size does not change what Article 50 requires.
- Only the arithmetic of the ceiling changes. For undertakings generally, the ceiling is the higher of €15 million or 3% of worldwide annual turnover; Article 99(6) inverts this for SMEs and start-ups, making it the lower of the two.
Pièges fréquents
- Reading the SME rule as a lighter obligation rather than a lower ceiling — the duties themselves are unchanged.
- Deferring scoping because of size — the register and front-end notices are the minimum viable controls.
Special cases
Content distributed on a very large online platform
Your AI-generated content is published on a designated very large online platform or search engine.
Ce qui s'applique
- Article 50 duties continue to apply to you as provider or deployer.
- The platform carries its own DSA systemic-risk obligations for generative content, including marking where feasible — those duties sit on the platform, not on you, and do not discharge your Article 50 disclosure.
- Where the same entity provides both the system and the underlying general-purpose model, or the system is integrated into a designated platform, the AI Office has a specific enforcement role alongside national authorities.
Pièges fréquents
- Assuming a platform's automatic AI label satisfies your own deployer disclosure — it does not.
Special cases
System built on your own GPAI model, or integrated into a designated platform
The same entity provides both the system and the general-purpose model, or the system is integrated into a designated very large online platform or search engine.
Ce qui s'applique
- The AI Office has a specific enforcement role in these configurations, alongside national market surveillance authorities.
Special cases
Law-enforcement uses
The system is used for the detection, prevention, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences.
Ce qui s'applique
- Specific exceptions exist across Art. 50(1)–(4), under the conditions stated in each paragraph.
Pièges fréquents
- The exceptions are conditional, not a blanket carve-out — document the reliance conditions for each use.
Sources primaires
- Article 50 — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act Service Desk)
Core legal text: duties, timing, accessibility, and exceptions.
- Commission FAQ — Transparency obligations under Article 50
Operational source for scope, exceptions, human review, the grace period, and enforcement.
- Guidelines on transparency obligations for providers and deployers
Commission guidelines adopted in July 2026.
- Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content
Voluntary, but assessed as an adequate way to demonstrate compliance with Article 50(2), (4) and (5).
- Quick facts — Transparency rules for AI systems
Official summary of obligations, penalties, the grace period, and the three optional EU icons — which can be downloaded from this page.
- Article 99 — Penalties
Ceilings for Article 50 breaches: the higher of the two figures for undertakings, the lower for SMEs and start-ups under Article 99(6).
- AI Omnibus — amendment to Article 50(2)
The 2 December 2026 marking transition is not in the 2024 text of the Regulation: Article 50(2) was amended by the AI Omnibus, which also postponed the high-risk regime while leaving Article 50 on its 2 August 2026 date. The Commission fact page records both points.
- Article 2 — Scope
Extra-territorial reach where outputs are used in the Union.
Cette checklist est fournie à titre informatif uniquement. Elle ne constitue pas un conseil juridique et ne crée aucune relation avocat-client. Elle reflète les orientations de la Commission et les documents officiels disponibles à la date de rédaction, et simplifie des questions qui peuvent dépendre de circonstances particulières. Vérifiez auprès des sources primaires ci-dessous et faites analyser votre situation.