Existing law requires, beginning on January 1, 2028, a vehicle with connected vehicle service to clearly indicate to a person who is inside the vehicle when a person who is outside the vehicle has accessed, among other things, connected vehicle location access. For these purposes, existing law defines "connected vehicle service" to mean any capability, including through a software application that is designed to be operated on a mobile device, to remotely obtain data from, or send commands to, a vehicle, and "connected vehicle location access" to mean a type of connected vehicle service that allows a person, who is outside of a vehicle, to view or track the location of the vehicle, as specified. If a vehicle includes connected vehicle location access, existing law requires a covered provider, as defined, to provide a mechanism that can be used by a driver who is inside a vehicle to immediately disable connected vehicle location access. Existing law delays the operation of this requirement depending on whether the vehicle was manufactured prior to, or on or after, January 1, 2028. Unless otherwise provided, a violation of the Vehicle Code constitutes an infraction. This bill would, instead, limit the provisions above to specified vehicles with connected vehicle access. The bill would apply the requirement for a vehicle with connected vehicle service to indicate to a person inside the vehicle if connected vehicle location access is enabled to all vehicles beginning with the 2031 model year. The bill would make this requirement operative beginning with the 2031 model year, for 2028, 2029, and 2030 model year vehicles, as soon as practicable after the vehicle is sold unless technologically infeasible, and on or before July 1, 2027, for 2027 model year or older vehicles unless technologically infeasible. By establishing a new duty on vehicle manufacturers, this bill would expand the general crime applicable to provisions under the Vehicle Code, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Digital Financial Assets Law, prohibits a person, on or after July 1, 2026, from engaging in digital financial asset business activity, or holding itself out as being able to engage in digital financial asset business activity, with, or on behalf of, a resident, unless any of certain criteria are met, including that the person is licensed with the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, as prescribed, or the person submits an application on or before July 1, 2026, and is awaiting approval or denial of that application. This bill would revise the above-described latter criterion to specify that the person submits a completed application, as provided. The Digital Financial Assets Law authorizes the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation to issue a conditional license to an applicant who holds or maintains a license to conduct virtual currency business activity in the State of New York, as specified, provided the license was issued or approved no later than January 1, 2023. This bill would revise the above-described authorization to require that the license be issued or approved no later than January 1, 2025. (2) The Digital Financial Assets Law defines "digital financial asset business activity" to mean any of specified activities, including, among others, exchanging, transferring, or storing a digital financial asset, as specified, or exchanging one or more digital representations of value used within one or more online games, game platforms, or family of games, as provided. This bill would remove exchanging one or more digital representations of value used within one or more online games, game platforms, or family of games from the definition of "digital financial business activity." The bill would specify that a "digital financial asset" does not include, among other things, a transaction in which a merchant grants digital representations of value that primarily relate to an affinity or rewards program, as provided, or a digital representation of value issued by or on behalf of a publisher and used primarily within online games or game platforms and that is not otherwise a digital financial asset. The Digital Financial Assets Law declares that its provisions do not apply to specified activity, including by a person who does not receive compensation for providing digital financial asset products or services or for conducting financial asset business activity or that is engaged in testing products or services with the person's own funds. This bill would specify that the above-described exclusion includes a person who merely retains the ability to terminate, suspend, or interrupt a digital financial transaction solely to prevent unauthorized or fraudulent activity and who is not compensated for that service. The Digital Financial Assets Law prohibits a covered person from exchanging, transferring, or storing a digital financial asset that is a stablecoin or engaging in digital financial asset administration of a stablecoin, as specified, unless certain conditions are met. However, existing law authorizes a covered person to exchange, transfer, or store a stablecoin or engage in digital financial asset administration of that stablecoin, as specified, if the stablecoin is approved by the commissioner and complies with certain requirements, restrictions, or prohibitions established by the commissioner. This bill would repeal the above-described provisions related to stablecoins. (3) The Digital Financial Assets Law requires a licensee to submit an annual report, as provided, containing specified information, including a description of any data security breach or cybersecurity event of the licensee. Existing law requires a licensee to file with the department, as applicable, a report of, among other things, a change in the licensee's business for the conduct of its digital financial asset business activity with, or on behalf of, a resident that meets one of specified criteria, including that the proposed change might raise safety and soundness or operational concerns. This bill would revise the above-described annual report to instead include a description of any material data security breach or cybersecurity event of the licensee. The bill would revise the specified criteria in the requirement to file the above-described report of a change in the licensee's business to instead include that the proposed change might raise material safety and soundness or operational concerns. Before engaging in digital financial asset business activity with a resident, the Digital Financial Assets Law requires a covered person, defined as a person required to obtain a license pursuant to that law, to disclose, as provided, certain information, including the resident's right to at least 14 days' prior notice of specified changes that have a material impact on digital financial asset business activity with the resident, or the policies applicable to the resident's account. Existing law requires a covered exchange, as provided, to certify on a form provided by the department that the covered exchange has taken specified actions, except for any digital financial asset approved for listing on or before January 1, 2023. In a transaction for or with a resident, existing law prohibits the covered exchange from interjecting a third party between the covered exchange and the best market for the digital financial asset in a manner inconsistent with specified requirements. This bill would prohibit the 14-day notice requirement from applying to changes in terms, conditions, or policies that are reasonably necessary to address a risk of loss to the resident or covered person, to the extent that the change does not relate to the fee schedule. The bill would instead exclude from the above-described certification requirement a digital financial asset approved for listing on or before January 1, 2025. The bill would require a covered person to provide and make available an up-to-date description of the order execution practices of the covered person, as specified. The bill would exempt a transaction in which a resident receives stablecoin, as defined, in exchange for legal tender or bank or credit union credit from the above-described prohibition against interjecting a third party. The Digital Financial Assets Law requires an applicant, as provided, to create, and during licensure, maintain in a record specified policies and procedures. Existing law requires these policies and procedures be disclosed separately from other disclosures made available to a resident, as specified, except for, among other things, an adopted information security program or an operational security program. This bill would instead exclude from the above-described requirement to disclose separately from other disclosures programs with information that is sensitive to potential security risks, as specified. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The Digital Financial Assets Law, on or after July 1, 2026, prohibits a person from engaging in digital financial asset business activity or holding itself out as being able to engage in digital financial asset business activity, with or on behalf of a resident unless any of specified conditions is true. The law defines "digital financial asset" to mean a digital representation of value that is used as a medium of exchange, unit of account, or store of value, and that is not legal tender, whether or not denominated in legal tender and defines "digital financial asset business activity" to mean, among other similar things, exchanging, transferring, or storing a digital financial asset or engaging in digital financial asset administration, whether directly or through an agreement with a digital financial asset control services vendor. This bill, the Digital Financial Asset Banking Act, would generally regulate a bank or a credit union under the examination authority of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation with respect to its provision of digital asset custody services, staking services, and digital asset transaction services, as those terms are defined, including by requiring certain disclosures to costumers and requiring certain financial safety measures. The bill would require a financial institution engaged in digital financial asset custody services to conduct an annual audit of its custodial activities and holdings that is either an independent audit or a review by the financial institution's board of directors for accuracy and signed be each board member under penalty of perjury. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize the department to enforce its provisions with administrative and civil remedies, as specified. The Corporate Securities Law of 1968 generally regulates the offering and selling in this state of a security, as defined. This bill would define "security" to not include a staking reward, as defined. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires every videogame retailer to post a sign, within the retail establishment in a prominent area, providing information to consumers about a videogame rating system or notifying consumers that a rating system is available to aid in the selection of a game and to make available to consumers, upon request, information that explains the videogame rating system. Existing law, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits a seller of a digital good, including a digital application or game, from advertising or offering for sale a digital good to a purchaser with the terms "buy," "purchase," or any other term that a reasonable person would understand to confer an unrestricted ownership interest in the digital good, or alongside an option for a time-limited rental, unless the seller receives at the time of each transaction an affirmative acknowledgment from the purchaser, or the seller provides to the consumer before executing each transaction a clear and conspicuous statement, as specified. Existing law defines "digital application or game" to mean any application or game that a person accesses and manipulates using a specialized electronic gaming device, computer, mobile device, tablet, or other device with a display screen, including any add-ons or additional content for that application or game. This bill, with regard to digital games first available for purchase or rereleased for purchase on or after January 1, 2028, and subject to certain exceptions, would require a digital game operator to communicate specified information to purchasers and prospective purchasers of a digital game 60 days before the operator ceases to provide services necessary for the ordinary use of the game. The bill would, beginning on the date an operator ceases to provide services necessary for the ordinary use of the game, require the operator to provide the purchaser with, among other things, an alternate version of, a patch or update to, or a refund for, the game, as provided, and prohibit the operator from selling, leasing, or otherwise distributing a version of the game that cannot be used by a purchaser independent of services controlled by the operator. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or a district attorney to bring a civil action for a violation of these provisions.
Existing law requires, among other things related to ensuring the safety of companion chatbots, an operator to prevent a companion chatbot on its companion chatbot platform from engaging with users unless the operator maintains a protocol for preventing the production of suicidal ideation, suicide, or self-harm content to the user, as specified. This bill, the Preventing AI User Self Endangerment (PAUSE) Act, would require an operator to adopt and make publicly available a policy governing its protocol for identifying and responding to credible crisis expressions and, for each companion chatbot an operator makes available to users in this state, implement a system for monitoring and detecting credible crisis expressions in user conversations with companion chatbots. The bill would require, if the monitoring system detects a credible crisis expression, the operator to take certain actions, including commence a crisis interruption pause, as specified. The bill would define "credible crisis expression" to mean a statement by a user of a companion chatbot that reasonably indicates, as determined through contextual analysis rather than keyword detection alone, intent to harm the user or others. This bill would require an operator of a companion chatbot to document certain information related to credible crisis expressions and crisis interruption pauses and, beginning January 1, 2028, annually report that information to the Office of Suicide Prevention. The bill would provide for its enforcement, as specified.
Existing law requires a state agency or department that utilizes generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) to directly communicate with a person regarding government services and benefits to ensure that those communications include a disclaimer that indicates to the person that the communication was generated by GenAI, as specified, and information describing how a person may contact a human employee of the state agency or department. This bill would instead require that disclaimer when a state agency or department uses GenAI to directly communicate with the public and would define "directly communicate" to mean to use GenAI, instead of a natural person, to communicate directly with a specific member of the public or to communicate a general public announcement, as specified.
Existing law establishes various privacy protections relating to the collection, use, sale, or distribution of personal information, images, or video recordings, including restrictions relating to the retention, access, use, sale, or sharing of images or video recordings collected through the operation of an in-vehicle camera. This bill would prohibit a security surveillance company, as defined, from distributing, selling, or otherwise authorizing a third party to access, use, or distribute content obtained from a consumer's security surveillance system without first obtaining the express consent of the consumer and the adult residents of a residential rental property or upon receipt of an order of a court or arbitrator.
Existing law requires that each death be registered with the local registrar of births and deaths in the district in which the death was officially pronounced or the body was found. Existing law designates persons responsible for completing a certificate of death and the required contents of the certificate. Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to implement an internet-based electronic death registration system for the creation, storage, and transfer of death registration information. Existing law authorizes the State Registrar to incorporate computer or telephone facsimile technology, or both, in the statewide program of death registration. This bill would require the State Registrar to use updated technology, including computer and mobile telephone applications, to upgrade the system. The bill would also require that specified individuals, including a physician, medical examiner, and local registrar, have the ability to access the electronic death registration system in addition to the individuals currently responsible for completing a certificate of death. The bill would also authorize specified individuals to attest to a death within the system using electronic, voice, or facsimile methods. The bill would require the department to update the system to allow this.
Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified, and that application is approved. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations setting forth requirements for the submission and approval of an application, including, among other things, any testing, equipment, and performance standards the department concludes are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads, as specified. Existing law authorizes a peace officer, as defined, to issue a notice of autonomous vehicle noncompliance upon observing an alleged violation of the Vehicle Code or upon observing an alleged violation of a local traffic ordinance adopted pursuant to the Vehicle Code by an autonomous vehicle while the autonomous technology is engaged. This bill would require a citation for a traffic violation by a level 4 or 5 autonomous vehicle to be issued to the manufacturer of the autonomous technology if a traffic violation was committed while either the vehicle did not have a person in the driver's seat or the vehicle had a person in the driver's seat and the autonomous technology was engaged. The bill would authorize those citations to be issued by first-class mail. The bill would require a citation to be issued to the driver of an autonomous vehicle of any level if a traffic violation was committed while there was a person in the driver's seat and the autonomous technology was not engaged. The bill would require a citation to be issued to the driver of a level 3 autonomous vehicle if a traffic violation was committed while there was a person in the driver's seat and the autonomous technology was engaged. The bill would authorize the driver to, as a defense, raise that the autonomous technology was responsible for the traffic violation. The bill would require the citation to be issued to the manufacturer of the autonomous technology if the court determines that a level 3 autonomous vehicle was the cause of the traffic violation. The bill would authorize the holder of the testing permit or deployment permit to contest a citation or penalty.
Existing law establishes the Low-Income Oversight Board and requires the Low-Income Oversight Board to advise the Public Utilities Commission on low-income electricity, gas, and water customer issues, and to, among other things, monitor and evaluate implementation of all programs provided to low-income electricity, gas, and water customers. This bill would establish the Low-Income Telecommunications Advisory Board with specified membership. The bill would require the Low-Income Telecommunications Advisory Board to, among other things, advise the commission on low-income telecommunications customer issues, serve as a liaison for the commission to low-income customers and stakeholders, provide certain reports to the Legislature, and monitor and evaluate implementation of all programs provided to low-income telecommunications customers, as provided. The bill would require the commission, in conjunction with the Low-Income Telecommunications Advisory Board, to increase participation in programs for low-income telecommunications customers and ensure that the cost burden of low-income telecommunications customers is reduced, as specified. Existing law vests the commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law, the Moore Universal Telephone Service Act, establishes the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service program to provide low-income households with access to affordable basic residential telephone service. This bill would require the commission to administer the lifeline program in a technologically inclusive manner and would prohibit the commission from discriminating against lifeline providers by adopting rules that favor or disfavor certain providers. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill would be part of the act, and a violation of a commission action implementing its provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
