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.
The Unruh Civil Rights Act requires persons within the jurisdiction of the state to be free and equal and, regardless of the person's sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, to be entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments, as prescribed, and makes a violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) a violation of the act. Existing law imposes liability upon a person who denies, aids, or incites a denial of, or makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to, rights afforded by law for actual damages suffered, exemplary damages, a civil penalty, and attorney's fees, as specified, to any person who was denied the specified rights. Existing law also imposes liability upon a person, firm, or corporation that denies or interferes with admittance to, or enjoyment of, public facilities or otherwise interferes with the rights of an individual with a disability, as specified, for damages and attorney's fees to a person who was denied those rights. This bill would grant to an entity an affirmative defense to a claim seeking statutory damages under the provisions described above on the basis of a specific accessibility barrier on the entity's internet website, as defined, if the entity provided evidence to the plaintiff demonstrating within 30 days of receiving a written prelawsuit demand from the plaintiff that either (1) the entity published a digital accessibility report on the accessibility page of its internet website disclosing the specific access barrier and updated that report to reflect remediation of the access barrier or (2) that various things were true regarding the entity's efforts to identify and remediate access barriers on its internet website, including the entity had a reasonable and good faith basis to believe that the internet website was accessible and conformed with the internet website accessibility standard, as specified. This bill would also prohibit a resource service provider from, in exchange for money or any other form of remuneration, negligently, recklessly, or knowingly constructing, licensing, distributing, or maintaining for online use a resource or part of an internet website that causes an entity's internet website to be inaccessible or not conformant with the internet website accessibility standard if the resource or part of the internet website is within the control of the resource service provider to remediate or from making a false representation that a resource or part of an internet website is accessible or conforms to the internet website accessibility standard. The bill would authorize a small business entity, as defined, and certain public attorneys, including the Attorney General, to bring a civil action to enforce that provision, as specified.
Existing law establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations to administer and enforce various laws relating to employment and working conditions. This bill would require an employer to provide a written notice to a worker that a workplace AI tool, as defined, was used to assist the employer in making employment-related decisions or to surveil workers in the workplace. The bill would require the notice to be given to a worker within a specified time and would require the notice to contain specified information, including the specific employment-related decisions likely to be affected by the use of the workplace AI tool. The bill would require an employer to maintain an updated list of all workplace AI tools currently in use and their impact on jobs, as specified, and to provide the list to workers annually. The bill would provide for enforcement by the Labor Commissioner or a public prosecutor, and alternatively would authorize any worker who has suffered damages, or their exclusive representative, to file a civil action for damages caused by the adverse action. The bill would establish remedies and penalties for violations, including a penalty of up to $500 for each violation. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
Existing law establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state, the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board, or commission. This bill would prohibit an employer from using a worker's personal information, as defined, to train an artificial intelligence system to replicate, automate, or replace a worker's job, and would prohibit an employer from selling, disclosing, or otherwise providing access to a worker's personal information to a third party for the purpose of training an artificial intelligence system to replicate, automate, or replace a worker's job. The bill would prohibit a vendor providing services to an employer under a contract from providing access to the personal information of an employer's worker to a third party or using the personal information of an employer's worker to train artificial intelligence, as specified. The bill would require a contract between an employer and vendor to include a requirement that the vendor implement and maintain reasonable security procedures to protect the worker's personal information from, among other things, unauthorized or illegal access. The bill would define terms for these provisions, including "employer" and "personal information." The bill would require the Labor Commissioner and authorize a public prosecutor to enforce these provisions. The bill would authorize a worker, or their exclusive representative, who suffered a violation of these provisions to bring a civil action for damages, injunctive relief, punitive damages, and attorney's fees and costs. The bill would establish a statutory penalty for a violation of these provisions of up to $500 for each violation. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
Existing law, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, among other things related to ensuring the safety of certain artificial intelligence models, requires a large frontier developer to write, implement, and clearly and conspicuously publish on its internet website a frontier AI framework that applies to the large frontier developer's frontier models and describes how the large frontier developer approaches, among other things, incorporating national standards, international standards, and industry-consensus best practices into its frontier AI framework. Existing law requires the Department of Technology to make recommendations about whether and how to update certain definitions for the purposes of the act, including the definition of "frontier model" so that it applies to foundation models at the frontier of artificial intelligence development. Existing law requires a contract entered into by any state agency for the procurement or laundering of apparel, garments, or corresponding accessories, or the procurement of equipment, materials, or supplies, other than procurement related to a public works contract, to require that a contractor certify that nothing furnished to the state pursuant to the contract has been laundered or produced by certain types of labor, including sweatshop labor and forced labor, as defined. Existing law requires the Department of Industrial Relations to establish a contractor responsibility program, including a Sweatfree Code of Conduct, to be signed by all bidders on state contracts and subcontracts, as provided. This bill would require the Department of Industrial Relations, in consultation with the Department of Technology, to convene a Foundation Model Labor and Procurement Working Group consisting of 9 members, as provided, to, among other things, assess labor practices underlying the development of modern foundation models and associated artificial intelligence systems and develop recommendations regarding whether and how the state should incorporate labor standards into procurement decisions for foundation models and associated artificial intelligence systems. The bill would require the working group to compile their findings and recommendations into a report and submit that report to the Legislature on or before December 31, 2027.
This bill designates March 22, 2026, as California STEAM Robotics Day to recognize the importance of robotics within science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics education. The measure directly affects schools and educational organizations across the state by providing a specific date for them to host events or activities focused on robotics. It does not create new funding, change laws, or mandate specific actions, but rather serves as a formal proclamation to raise awareness about the field. The legislation was passed by the state legislature and signed into law as part of the 2026 statutes.
