Article 14 won't implement itself.
The compliance deadlines have started.
If you're a team building AI that makes decisions about people (hiring, credit, healthcare, public services), the EU AI Act classifies your system as high-risk.
That means you need to prove human oversight is designed into how it works, with evidence.
This applies whether you're based in the EU or selling into it.
The Act is dense, the guidance is abstract, and the gap between "we should do something" and "here's what we're actually building" is where compliance stalls.
That's what Requisite is for. Compliance lawyers tell you what Article 14 requires. Requisite tells you how to build it.
Requisite scores your answers, identifies the gaps, maps them to your Article 14 obligations, and gives you access to oversight patterns your developers can adapt and build from.
Not regulated? If your AI affects real lives, building systems people can trust isn't optional.
You might need Requisite if:
- You're deploying AI in the EU but aren't sure what Article 14 actually requires of your product
- You know you have oversight gaps but don't know how to find or fix them
- Your compliance conversation is stuck between legal and engineering with no one translating
- You couldn't produce evidence of human oversight if someone asked tomorrow
- You need compliance guidance that fits a startup budget, not an enterprise one
About the name
W. Ross Ashby was a British psychiatrist and cybernetics pioneer. In the 1950s, his work on the Law of Requisite Variety proved that effective control of complex systems isn't about authority. It's about designing the right conditions for human judgement.
That was true in 1956. It's essential now.