Is the detection mechanism going to be open, free, and possible to run locally without prostrating to an opaque third-party company that will do whatever they w

Is the detection mechanism going to be open, free, and possible to run locally without prostrating to an opaque third-party company that will do whatever they want with the text content provided (including using it for training), and take no responsibility in case of false-positives for which there can exist no proof or evidence against by the victim? This is another useless, if not actively harmful, performative EU regulation, for which they ought to take the full blame despite the fact "AI" companies have been researching and working on watermarks, including in text, for a while now. Just copy-and-paste everything you see and let a machine decide for you if what you're reading is slop or not. Real propaganda machine doesn't care about inane rules and won't waste time with gimped mainstream models either. >Claude may not be the original author. People often use Claude to proofread, translate, summarize, or convert files. The output can carry a Claude mark even if the underlying ideas, text, or data originated from another source; Such models already struggle not making any unnecessary or unwanted changes to a corpus, this makes them unable to by design.