Law / United States / 
California
California AI Transparency Act (SB 942, as amended by AB 853)
Cal. Bus. and Prof. Code Sections 22757 to 22757.6
A citation is an address, not a summary. The first part names the law; what follows narrows it to the exact section, article or paragraph.
What follows is LexLint's own research summary of this law, not legal advice.
In force 52 days, effective 2 August 2026.
An AI transparency rule binding private bodies.
As of 14 August 2026.
What it requires
- Offer a manifest disclosure option, a visible AI-generated content label
- Embed a latent disclosure of machine-readable provenance data in content the system creates
- Provide a free public tool that detects whether content came from your system
- Later phases add duties for large online platforms and generative AI hosting platforms from 2027-01-01, and for capture device manufacturers from 2028-01-01
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureNo
Private right of actionNo
Penalty structure
Bus. and Prof. Code section 22757.4(a)(1): a violator of the chapter is liable for a civil penalty of $5,000 per violation, collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel; a prevailing plaintiff also recovers reasonable attorney's costs and fees. Section 22757.4(b) makes each day a covered provider, large online platform, or capture device manufacturer remains in violation a separate, discrete violation, recorded here as the per_violation_unit. The chapter names no administrative fine and no private right of action; section 22757.4(c) separately lets the same three officials sue a third-party licensee for injunctive relief and fees, with no additional civil-penalty amount stated.
- Rule
- Per violation only
- As of
- 2 September 2026
- Currency
- USD
- Per violation unit
- Day
- Per violation amount
- 5,000
Over one month of continuous breach, USD 152,200.
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
California Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel, each empowered to bring a civil action for the chapter's civil penalty; the chapter names no administrative regulator.
Enforcement record
The chapter names no administrative regulator; its civil penalty under Section 22757.4 is recovered only in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel, and the Attorney General's site carries no dedicated page for this chapter comparable to its Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act page. A review of the Attorney General's most recent press releases, September 1 through September 17, 2026, names no civil action or civil penalty under this chapter; that window does not reach back to the chapter's 2026-08-02 operative date as set by AB 853, and earlier press releases were not reviewed.
- As of
- 17 September 2026
- Source link
- https://oag.ca.gov/news
What it reaches
How the hook was established
express
What makes it apply
Market targeting, Place of effect
Obligation class
Content labelling, Disclosure
Applicability criteria
- As of
- 13 September 2026
- Combinator
- All of
- Criteria
- the generative AI system has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users, counted worldwide rather than in California
- the generative AI system is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of California
What it makes you log
Log retention
Bus. and Prof. Code section 22757.2(c) bars retention outright rather than setting a period, so no minimum or maximum value is stated.
- As of
- 21 September 2026
- Basis
- Unspecified
- Prohibits retaining
- Personal information from a user of the AI detection tool, other than the contact information of a user who opts in to being contacted about feedback; any content a user submits to the tool; and any personal provenance data detected in content submitted to the tool.
Logging duty
The chapter requires a covered provider to label AI-generated content and offer a public detection tool. It states no duty to create, keep, or produce on demand a log or record of that labelling or of who used the detection tool; instead it bars the provider from retaining most of the information a user's use of the tool would generate.
- Kind
- None
- As of
- 21 September 2026
Who checks it
Audit expectation
none
What this law does
Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page.
A covered provider of a generative AI system must offer a manifest disclosure option (a visible AI-generated content label), embed a latent disclosure of machine-readable provenance data in content it creates, and provide a free public AI-content detection tool. Whether a provider is covered turns on the scale test in the chapter's own definition at section 22757.1(d), recorded on this instrument as its applicability criteria.
AB 853 (2025) moved the operative date from 1 January 2026 to 2 August 2026, now past, and layered on later duties for large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms effective 1 January 2027, and for capture device manufacturers effective 1 January 2028, neither yet in effect.
Confirmed against leginfo, Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 22757) was added to Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code, with sections running 22757 through 22757.6 (definitions, detection tool, disclosure duties, penalties, exemptions, and operative date). A Section 22756 to 22756.6 range, sometimes cited for this chapter, does not exist.
When LexLint raises it
generates_contentdeploys_chatbot
Read the law
Every line above is drawn from the primary source linked here, read on the date shown. This is a research summary, not legal advice.