“This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act,” Kaplan wrote in the post.

Kaplan added that more than 40 of Europe’s largest businesses signed a letter earlier this month, asking the European Commission to halt the implementation of the AI Act.

“We share concerns raised by these businesses that this overreach will throttle the development and deployment of frontier AI models in Europe, and stunt European companies looking to build businesses on top of them,” Kaplan wrote.

Politico reported July 4 that 46 leaders of top European companies signed an open letter calling for a two-year pause on implementation of the AI Act, saying “unclear, overlapping and increasingly complex EU regulations” make it harder to do business in the region.

The European Commission published the final version of the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice on July 10, saying this voluntary framework is designed to help artificial intelligence (AI) companies comply with the European Union’s AI Act.

The code of practice seeks to clarify legal obligations under the act for providers of general-purpose AI models, especially those posing systemic risks like ones that could aid in the development of chemical and biological weapons.

The AI Act, which was approved in 2024, is the first comprehensive legal framework governing AI. It aims to ensure that AI systems used in the EU are safe, transparent and respectful of fundamental human rights.

The code is voluntary, but AI model companies that sign on will benefit from lower administrative burdens and greater legal certainty, according to the commission.

OpenAI said in a July 11 blog post that it intended to sign the code of practice if the current version is formally approved.

“Signing the Code reflects our commitment to providing capable, accessible and secure AI models for Europeans to fully participate in the economic and societal benefits of the Intelligence Age,” OpenAI said in the post. “We have always developed models with transparency, accountability and safety at the forefront: principles that are also reflected in the Code.”