The people behind the guide
AAMS is a small practice of qualified EU lawyers working on artificial intelligence regulation. Small enough that the person who answers your enquiry is the person who does the work.
Lawyers who also build the systems
The AI Act is easier to advise on when you have shipped something under it. We run AI systems of our own in legal practice, which is where most of what is written on this site comes from.
That is also why the guide reads the way it does. The questions in it are the ones we had to answer for ourselves first, in the order they actually arrive.
Talk to usWhat that means for you
- Legal work carried out by lawyers, under professional rules and professional confidentiality
- Advice that accounts for what is technically possible, not only what is legally desirable
- A plain answer when the question is organisational rather than legal
- A practice small enough to say no to work it should not take
Two names, and what each of them is for
Between them they cover the regulatory analysis, the documentation and the criminal-law edge of AI use, which is where a surprising number of client questions end up.
Technology lawyer, working on AI regulation, data protection in language models and AI Act compliance. He has built and deployed AI platforms for the Italian legal sector, including a privacy-first browser extension that anonymises prompts before they reach a chatbot.
The RRCS framework used across this site, and the compliance method behind it, came out of that work rather than out of a textbook.
- Role and risk classification, and the argument that has to survive scrutiny
- Article 50 transparency notices and product-level disclosure
- Data protection where AI systems and personal data meet
Works on European technology regulation and the practical side of the AI Act: risk analysis, impact assessments and building a compliance position an organisation can actually operate.
She is completing a doctorate in criminal law on offences committed through artificial intelligence, which is the part of the subject most advisers leave alone and most boards eventually ask about.
- Gap analysis and the evidence that has to sit behind it
- Impact assessments and governance documentation
- Liability exposure where AI use crosses into criminal law
Four commitments we can actually keep
Scope and cost in writing, first
You get the shape of the work and what it costs before anything starts. If the honest answer is that you do not need us yet, that is the answer you get.
Plain language, references kept in
Documents you can hand to a client, an insurer or an authority without translating them first, with the article numbers still visible underneath.
Confidentiality as a professional duty
Not a policy we wrote for ourselves. It is the obligation that comes with the practising title, and it covers everything you tell us.
No manufactured urgency
The deadlines in this Regulation are real and dated. We will point at the date rather than at a countdown, and tell you when something genuinely does not reach you.
We work in English, Italian, French and Spanish. The written site is complete in English, and correspondence in the other three is handled by the people named above rather than by machine translation.
Bring us something concrete
The free assessment takes a few minutes and gives us a real situation to react to rather than a general question.