Existing law prohibits a public agency, which includes the state, a city, a county, a city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state, a city, a county, or a city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency, from selling, sharing, or transferring automated license plate recognition (ALPR) information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. Existing law defines ALPR information as information or data collected through the use of an ALPR system. This bill would provide that "public agency" does not include a transportation agency, a public transit operator, or a local department of transportation or public works department, as specified. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2026, require new, updated, expansions of, or addendums of contractual agreements with ALPR vendors, manufacturers, or suppliers to mandate that no default access is provided to any national ALPR database and that an agency's collected scans are by default not accessible to any other agency, and would impose new requirements on sharing between California state law enforcement agencies. The bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to use ALPR information only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense. The bill would prohibit a public agency from retaining ALPR information for more than 60 days after the date of collection if it does not match information on an authorized hot list, as defined, and as of January 1, 2026, would require a public agency to delete all ALPR information that has been held for more than 60 days and does not match information on an authorized hot list within 14 days. By imposing new requirements on public agencies, which include local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines an ALPR operator as a person that operates an ALPR system, which does not include a transportation agency. Existing law defines an ALPR end-user a person that accesses or uses an ALPR system, which does not include, among other things, a transportation agency. This bill would additionally exclude from the definitions of "ALPR operator" and "ALPR end-user" a public transit operator, a local department of transportation or public works department, or an airport or airport operator, as provided. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would require those security procedures and practices to include safeguards for managing which employees can see the data from their systems, as specified, and requiring data security training and data privacy training for all employees that access ALPR information. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to implement a usage and privacy policy that includes, among other things, a description of the job title or other designation of the employees and independent contractors who are authorized to access and use ALPR information. This bill would require the usage and privacy policy to identify what purpose employees and independent contractors access and use ALPR information for. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to, contingent upon an appropriation of sufficient funds, conduct annual random audits on a public agency that is an ALPR operator or ALPR end-user to determine whether they have implemented and are adhering to that usage and privacy policy. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy and to maintain a record of that access that includes, among other things, the purpose for accessing the information. This bill would instead require that record of access maintained by the ALPR operator to include the case file number or task force name, as applicable, that justifies the search query, and would provide that no queries shall be allowed without a log entry with a valid and current case file number or task force name from the agency conducting the query. 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. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. Existing law requires the state board to establish a Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization, and Storage Program, as provided, to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and viability of carbon capture, utilization, or storage technologies and carbon dioxide removal technologies and facilitate the capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide from those technologies, where appropriate. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with the state board, to publish a framework for governing agreements regarding 2 or more tracts of land overlying the same geologic storage reservoir or reservoirs for purposes of managing, developing, and operating a carbon dioxide capture, removal, or sequestration project, as provided. This bill would require the state board to establish and administer the Carbon Dioxide Removal Purchase Program as a competitive grant process for eligible carbon dioxide removal projects, as specified. The bill would require the state board, on or before January 1, 2028, and annually thereafter, to conduct and publish on its internet website a survey of carbon dioxide removal projects existing or in development within the state, and, on or before December 31, 2027, and annually thereafter, until December 31, 2035, to publish on its internet website a report describing Carbon Dioxide Removal Purchase Program activities completed and carbon dioxide removal projects to date, as specified. The bill would require the state board, on or after July 1, 2026, but on or before December 31, 2035, to fund carbon dioxide removal projects in an amount totaling $50,000,000. The bill would authorize up to 10% of that amount to be used to supplement necessary administrative costs in establishing the program. The bill would prohibit carbon dioxide removal projects from exceeding $25,000,000 of grants toward qualified carbon dioxide removals in any one of specified project categories or $12,500,000 of grants towards any one individual carbon dioxide removal project sponsor, except as specified. The bill would require that eligible carbon dioxide removal projects permanently retire the contracted tons of removed carbon dioxide from any future carbon dioxide removals credit issuance. The bill would require the state board, on or before January 1, 2028, to adopt guidelines, including the definition of an eligible carbon dioxide removal project, for the program, which the bill would require to be consistent with certain provisions governing carbon dioxide capture, removal, or sequestration projects, as specified. The bill would make implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation by the Legislature for purposes of the program. The bill would require all funds to be available for encumbrance or expenditure until June 30, 2035, and to be available for liquidation until June 30, 2035.
(1) Existing law prohibits the false impersonation of another person in either their personal or official capacity with the intent to steal or defraud, as specified. This bill would define various terms related to artificial intelligence and digital replication, and would clarify that false impersonation includes the use of a digital replica with the intent to impersonate another for purposes of these and other criminal provisions. (2) Existing law creates a civil cause of action against any person who knowingly uses the name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness of another person, without their consent, for specified purposes. When a photograph or likeness of an employee of the person using the photograph or likeness appearing in an advertisement or other publication is incidental and not essential to the purpose of the publication, existing law establishes a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence that failure to obtain the consent of an employee was not a knowing use of an employee's photograph or likeness. This bill would clarify that, for purposes of this cause of action, a voice or likeness includes a digital replica, as defined. The bill would also remove the provisions establishing the rebuttable presumption when an employee's likeness or photograph appears in an advertisement or other publication. (3) Existing law governs the admissibility of evidence in court proceedings. Existing law prescribes procedures for the authentication of photographs and audio and video recordings. This bill would require the Judicial Council, by no later than January 1, 2027, to review the impact of artificial intelligence on the admissibility of proffered evidence in court proceedings and develop any necessary rules of court to assist courts in assessing claims that proffered evidence has been generated by or manipulated by artificial intelligence and determining whether such evidence is admissible. (4) Existing law, the Unfair Competition Law, establishes a statutory cause of action for unfair competition, including any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and establishes remedies and penalties in that regard, including civil penalties. This bill would require, by December 1, 2026, and except as provided, any person or entity that makes available to consumers any artificial intelligence technology that enables a user to create a digital replica, as defined, to provide a consumer warning that unlawful use of the technology to depict another person without prior consent may result in civil or criminal liability for the user. The bill would require the warning to be hyperlinked on any page or screen where the consumer may input a prompt to the technology and included in the terms and conditions for use of the technology. The bill would also impose a civil penalty for violations of the requirement. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 3344 of the Civil Code proposed by SB 683 to be operative only if this bill and SB 683 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires the Department of Technology to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems (ADS) that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. Existing law establishes the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, which is composed of various departments responsible for protecting and promoting the rights and interests of workers in California, including the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, led by the Labor Commissioner, within the Department of Industrial Relations. This bill would require an employer to provide a written notice that an ADS, for the purpose of making employment-related decisions, not including hiring, is in use at the workplace to all workers that will foreseeably be directly affected by the ADS, as specified. The bill would require the employer to maintain an updated list of all ADS currently in use. The bill would require an employer to notify, as provided, a job applicant that the employer utilizes an ADS when making hiring decisions, if the employer will use the ADS in making decisions for that position. The bill would prohibit an employer from using an ADS that does certain functions and would limit the purposes and manner in which an ADS may be used to make decisions. The bill would authorize a worker to request, and require an employer to provide, a copy of the most recent 12 months of the worker's own data primarily used by an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision, as specified. The bill would require an employer that primarily relied on an ADS to make a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision to provide the affected worker with a written notice, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, threatening to discharge, demoting, suspending, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against any worker for taking certain actions asserting their rights under the bill. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as specified, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring a civil action. The bill would set forth specified types of relief that a plaintiff may seek and specified penalties that an employer that violates these provisions is subject to, including a $500 civil penalty. The bill would also provide that an employer who complies with the requirements related to notice in this bill is not required to comply with any substantially similar provisions under any other state law, except as specified. The bill would not apply to parties covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement if the agreement contains specified information, including an explicit waiver of the bill's provisions. The bill would declare that its provisions do not prohibit any employer from complying with regulatory or contractual requirements in the provision of products or services to the federal government, as defined. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable.
Existing law generally regulates social media platforms, including by requiring a social media company to post terms of service for each social media platform owned or operated by the company in a manner reasonably designed to inform all users of the social media platform of the existence and contents of the terms of service, as prescribed. Existing law generally prohibits a person from using violence or intimidation to interfere with another person's enjoyment of certain rights or because of certain attributes of that person, including the person's political affiliation, race, or sexual orientation, and punishes violations of that law with certain civil penalties or as misdemeanors, as prescribed. This bill would make a social media platform, as defined, that violates the above-referenced provisions of law relating to personal rights through its algorithms that relay content to users or aids, abets, acts in concert, or conspires in violation of those laws, or is a joint tortfeasor in an action alleging a violation of those laws, liable for specified civil penalties. The bill would declare its provisions to be severable and would declare attempted waiver of its provisions to be void and unenforceable. This bill would become operative on January 1, 2027.
The California AI Transparency Act requires a person that creates, codes, or otherwise produces a generative artificial intelligence system that has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users and is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of the state to make available an AI detection tool at no cost to the user that, among other things, allows a user to assess whether image, video, or audio content, or content that is any combination thereof, was created or altered by the covered provider's generative artificial intelligence system. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 prohibits certain businesses from selling or sharing the personal information of consumers if the business has actual knowledge that the consumer is less than 16 years of age, unless the consumer, if the consumer is at least 13 years of age and less than 16 years of age, or the consumer's parent or guardian, if the consumer is less than 13 years of age, has affirmatively authorized the sale or sharing of the consumer's personal information. This bill, the Leading Ethical AI Development (LEAD) for Kids Act, would, among other things related to the use of certain artificial intelligence systems by children, prohibit a person, partnership, corporation, business entity, or state or local government agency that makes a companion chatbot available to users from making a companion chatbot available to a child unless the companion chatbot is not foreseeably capable of doing certain things that could harm a child, including encouraging the child to engage in self-harm, suicidal ideation, violence, consumption of drugs or alcohol, or disordered eating. The act would authorize the Attorney General to recover a certain civil penalty for a violation of the bill, as prescribed. The act would authorize a child who suffers actual harm as a result of a violation of the bill, or a parent or guardian acting on behalf of that child, to bring a civil action to recover, among other relief, actual damages. This bill would provide that its provisions are severable.
Existing law generally provides protections for minors on the internet, including the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act that, among other things, requires a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to do certain things, including estimate the age of child users with a reasonable level of certainty appropriate to the risks that arise from the data management practices of the business or apply the privacy and data protections afforded to children to all consumers and prohibits an online service, product, or feature from, among other things, using dark patterns to lead or encourage children to provide personal information beyond what is reasonably expected to provide that online service, product, or feature or to forego privacy protections. This bill, beginning January 1, 2027, would require, among other things related to age verification with respect to software applications, an operating system provider, as defined, to provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder, as defined, to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user's age bracket to applications available in a covered application store and to provide a developer, as defined, who has requested a signal with respect to a particular user with a digital signal via a reasonably consistent real-time application programming interface regarding whether a user is in any of several age brackets, as prescribed. The bill would require a developer to request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. This bill would prohibit an operating system provider or a covered application store from using data collected from a third party in an anticompetitive manner, as specified. This bill would punish noncompliance with a civil penalty to be enforced by the Attorney General, as prescribed. This bill would declare its provisions to be severable.
Existing law authorizes a court to issue a restraining order to a person to prevent abuse, as specified, based on reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse. Existing law authorizes the order to be issued solely on the affidavit or testimony of the person requesting the restraining order. Existing law requires a manufacturer of a connected device to equip the device with a reasonable security feature or features that are appropriate to the nature and function of the device, appropriate to the information it may collect, contain, or transmit, and designed to protect the device and information contained in the device from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would authorize a survivor, as defined, or a designated representative of a survivor, to submit a device protection request to an account manager, as defined, seeking to terminate a perpetrator's access to a connected device or associated user account. The bill would define "survivor" for these purposes to mean an individual who has had specified criminal acts committed or allegedly committed against them or who cares for another individual against whom those criminal acts have been committed or allegedly committed, as provided. The bill would require an account manager, within 2 business days of receiving a complete device protection request, to terminate or disable the perpetrator's access to the connected device or user account, or to inform the survivor, in a clear and conspicuous manner, of any methods to reset the device to factory settings or a similar state that removes all account holders, as provided. The bill would specify the requirements for a device protection request and would impose certain requirements on an account manager in processing a request. By providing that a device protection request may include a copy of a signed affidavit, the bill would expand the crime of perjury, and thus impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the account manager to clearly describe the process to submit a device protection request on their internet website or mobile application and would prohibit the account manager from providing specified information to the perpetrator. The bill would require an account manager and any officer, director, employee, vendor, or agent thereof to treat any information submitted by a survivor or a designated representative of a survivor as confidential and securely dispose of the information, as provided. This bill would authorize enforcement of these provisions by injunction or civil penalty in any court action by any person injured by a violation of those provisions, the Attorney General, a district attorney, county counsel, a city attorney, or a city prosecutor, against an account manager or perpetrator, as provided. The bill would prohibit a waiver of these prohibitions and would declare that these provisions are severable. Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte order for, among other things, disturbing the peace of the other party. Existing law provides that disturbing the peace of the other party may be committed directly or indirectly, including through the use of a third party, and by any method or through any means including, but not limited to, telephone, online accounts, text messages, internet-connected devices, or other electronic technologies. This bill would provide that, for purposes of those provisions, an internet-connected device includes a connected device as described in the bill. 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 establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law generally imposes penalties on a person who negligently, willfully, or maliciously discloses the results of a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) test to a third party in a manner that identifies or provides identifying characteristics of the person to whom the test results apply, as specified. Existing law, notwithstanding the above-described restrictions, authorizes the recording of the HIV test results by the physician who ordered the test in the test subject's medical record and authorizes other disclosure of the results without written authorization of the test subject, or the subject's representative, to the test subject's providers of health care, excluding a regulated health care service plan, for purposes of diagnosis, care, or treatment of the patient. This bill would authorize a provider of health care to disclose the results of an HIV test that identifies or provides identifying characteristics of a Medi-Cal beneficiary without written authorization of the test subject, or the subject's representative, to the Medi-Cal managed care plan to which the beneficiary is assigned, if applicable, and to external quality review organizations conducting external quality reviews of Medi-Cal managed care plans, for the purpose of administering quality improvement programs, including, but not limited to, value-based payment programs and healthy behavior incentive programs, designed to improve HIV care for Medi-Cal beneficiaries. Under the bill, HIV test results that do not identify or provide identifying characteristics of the test subjects would be authorized for disclosure without written authorization by the Medi-Cal managed care plan to departmental staff for the above-described purpose. The bill would make certain clarifying or declaratory statements with regard to related provisions.
Existing law provides that everyone is responsible not only for the result of their willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by their want of ordinary care or skill in the management of their property or person. Existing law requires the developer of a generative artificial intelligence system or service that is released on or after January 1, 2022, and made publicly available to Californians for use, to post on the developer's internet website documentation regarding the data used by the developer to train the generative artificial intelligence system or service. Existing law defines "artificial intelligence" for these purposes. This bill would prohibit a defendant who developed, modified, or used artificial intelligence, as defined, from asserting a defense that the artificial intelligence autonomously caused the harm to the plaintiff.
