California AI Transparency Act: SB 942 and AB 853

When Does SB 942 Apply, and Where Does AB 853 Fit In?

AB 853 pushed the Act's start back from January 1, 2026, and the Act took effect on August 2, 2026. SB 942 (Senate Bill 942, Chapter 291) was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on September 19, 2024. It added Chapter 25, starting at Section 22757, to Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code.

AB 853 (Assembly Bill 853, Chapter 674) was signed on October 13, 2025. It rewrote Section 22757.6 to set the August date and added duties for other parties that start in 2027 and 2028.

SB 1000 later rewrote much of the Act but left Section 22757.6 alone, so August 2, 2026 is still the start date. As of November 6, 2026, the two later dates are still ahead.

Key dates in the California AI Transparency Act

Date	What happens	Who is affected
September 19, 2024	SB 942 approved and filed	No one yet
October 13, 2025	AB 853 approved and filed	Covered providers and, later, platforms and device makers
August 2, 2026	The Act becomes operative	Covered providers
September 30, 2026	SB 1000 and AB 2713 approved; SB 1000 takes effect immediately	Covered providers and large online platforms
January 1, 2027	Added duties begin	Large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms
January 1, 2028	Added duties begin	Capture device manufacturers

Who Counts as a Covered Provider Under SB942

Since SB 1000, you are a covered provider if you make a generative AI system that the public can reach in California, however many people use it. Before September 30, 2026, the definition also required more than 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users. Where the provider is based still does not come into it.

The statute defines a generative AI system, or GenAI system, as any AI that can produce derived synthetic content that mirrors the structure and characteristics of its training data. That includes text, images, video and audio, but the disclosure duties cover only the last three. You will also see the statute called the California AI disclosure law.

The exemptions are narrower than before. The Act does not apply to a product, service, website or app that offers only non-user-generated videogames. SB 1000 dropped television, streaming, movie and interactive experiences from that list.

Until January 1, 2029, it also does not apply to a GenAI system designed to primarily function as assistive technology. The statute defines that as equipment, products or services that help people with disabilities increase, maintain or improve their functional capabilities.

What SB 1000 Changed on September 30, 2026

SB 1000 (Senate Bill 1000, Chapter 861) was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on September 30, 2026. It is an urgency statute, so it took effect that day instead of waiting for the usual start date.

SB 1000 widened who is covered and cut the duties to three: a latent disclosure, a free verification tool and the licensing rules. It amended Sections 22757.1 through 22757.5 and added Section 22757.4.1, a penalty section that is repealed on January 1, 2029.

The Act before and after SB 1000

Topic	Before SB 1000	After SB 1000
Covered provider	More than 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users	No user threshold
Manifest disclosure	Offer users the option	Duty removed
Latent disclosure	Four items	Five items, adding whether content was created or altered
Tool name	AI detection tool	Disclosure verification tool
Exemptions	Video game, TV, streaming, movie, interactive experiences	Videogames only, plus assistive technology until 2029
Licensee modifies the system	Revoke the license within 96 hours	Terminate or notify within 72 hours
Penalty	$5,000 per violation	Same, plus $50,000 for a false assistive technology claim

AB 2713 (Assembly Bill 2713, Chapter 856) was signed the same day. It rewrote only Section 22757.3.1, the large online platform duties that start on January 1, 2027.

Three Duties: Latent Disclosure, Verification Tool, Licensing

After SB 1000, a covered provider has three duties: include a latent disclosure, offer a disclosure verification tool free of charge, and tell licensees their obligations and act when one stops complying. The first two cover image, video or audio content, or any mix of them.

The three duties after SB 1000

Duty	What the covered provider must do
Latent disclosure	Include a disclosure, as far as technically feasible, in image, video or audio content its system creates or alters, except content changed only by a minor modification
Disclosure verification tool	Make a free tool available that checks content against the provider's own system
Licensing	Tell licensees about their obligations, and act within 72 hours if an identifiable licensee's changes break compliance

The manifest disclosure option is gone, so the latent disclosure is now the only disclosure a covered provider has to place. Before SB 1000, the definitions described a manifest disclosure as one a natural person can easily perceive, understand or recognize, and a latent disclosure as one that is present but not manifest.

The latent disclosure carries five items, either directly or through a link to a permanent website. They are the provider's name, the GenAI system's name and version information, the time and date of creation or alteration, a unique identifier, and whether the system created or altered the content. From January 1, 2029, it must also say whether the system is designed to primarily function as assistive technology.

The disclosure must be permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove or tamper with. It also has to work with the provider's disclosure verification tool and be compliant or interoperable with widely recognized industry standards.

Content changed only by a minor modification needs no latent disclosure. The statute lists eight such edits: a change to brightness, contrast or color; sharpening; saturating; file resizing; scaling; cropping; file format conversion; and denoising or removing background noise in audio.

Licensing now runs on notice and short deadlines. A provider that licenses its GenAI system must tell the licensee about its obligations when it grants the license.

If the provider knows an identifiable licensee has modified the system so it no longer complies, it has 72 hours to act. It must either end the authorization or send a notice. The notice states the noncompliance and that the provider must report the licensee to the Attorney General if the problem is not fixed.

A notified licensee must bring the system into compliance or stop using and offering it, and report which it did to the provider within 96 hours. If no report arrives, or the licensee did neither, the provider reports the licensee to the Attorney General. The provider does not have to monitor how licensees use the system.

The Verification Tool That Replaced the AI Detection Tool

SB 1000 renamed the AI detection tool the disclosure verification tool. The tool is still free, checks content only against the provider's own system, takes uploads or URLs, and can be called through an API. The name refers to that statutory tool, not a general checker that guesses whether any text or image came from AI.

Provenance data now means information about where a piece of digital content came from and how it was modified. It has to be in a format that is compliant or interoperable with widely adopted specifications from an established standards body.

System provenance data is provenance data that cannot reasonably be linked to a particular user and describes the device, system or service that generated the content or relates to its authenticity. The tool has to meet six criteria:

• It tells a user whether a given image, video, or audio file was created or altered by that provider's own GenAI system, apart from minor modifications.
• It outputs any system provenance data detected in the content.
• It does not output personal information found in the content unless the person it concerns expressly consents. That person must first be told what may be shown, and that personal information embedded or exported in provenance data cannot be pulled back from copies already in circulation.
• It is publicly accessible, though the provider may impose reasonable limits on access to prevent or respond to demonstrable risks to the security or integrity of its GenAI system, or to prevent misuse of the tool for malicious purposes.
• It lets a user upload content or provide a URL that links to online content.
• It supports technology, including an application programming interface, so a user can invoke it without visiting the provider's website.

Providers must collect user feedback on how well the tool works and use relevant feedback to improve it. They may not collect, use, keep, sell or share personal information from the tool's users or the content it processes beyond what is strictly necessary to comply, except to contact a user who opts in. They also may not make access to the GenAI system or the tool depend on handing over more personal information than that.

A provider can meet this duty by sending users to a third-party disclosure verification tool instead. That tool has to comply with the same section, work with the provider's latent disclosures, and be clearly and conspicuously reachable from the provider's interface.

What a Violation of the California AI Disclosure Law Costs

After AB 853 and SB 1000, every violation of the Act costs a $5,000 civil penalty, which the Attorney General, a city attorney or a county counsel can sue to recover. A plaintiff who wins is entitled to all reasonable attorney's costs and fees.

Three groups are penalized by the day: covered providers, large online platforms and capture device manufacturers. For them, each day out of compliance counts as a separate violation. GenAI hosting platforms are not on that list.

SB 1000 added a separate penalty. Falsely claiming that a GenAI system is designed to primarily function as assistive technology costs $50,000 per violation, each day again counting separately, until that section is repealed on January 1, 2029. SB 1000 also stopped lawsuits filed before it took effect from going ahead if the conduct does not break the Act as amended.

SB 942 and AB 853 differ on who is liable. The 2024 text named a covered provider that violates the Act; AB 853 makes any violator of the Act liable. The amount and the three offices that can sue stayed the same, and SB 1000 kept that wording.

Who can sue, and for what

Situation	Who may bring the action	What can be recovered
Violation of the Act	Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel	$5,000 per violation; a prevailing plaintiff recovers reasonable attorney's costs and fees
False assistive technology claim (until January 1, 2029)	Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel	$50,000 per violation; a prevailing plaintiff recovers reasonable attorney's costs and fees

What AB 853 Adds in 2027-28 for Platforms and Device Makers

Three more groups get duties under AB 853: large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms from January 1, 2027, and capture device manufacturers from January 1, 2028. They sit in the new Sections 22757.3.1, 22757.3.2 and 22757.3.3. "Capture device manufacturer" is the statute's term for a device maker.

Who gets added, and when

Who	Start	Main duties
Large online platforms	January 1, 2027	Detect provenance data, show what it says, let users inspect it, and not knowingly strip it (as rewritten by AB 2713)
GenAI hosting platforms	January 1, 2027	Must not knowingly offer a GenAI system that does not place the disclosures required by Section 22757.3
Capture device manufacturers	January 1, 2028	Offer a latent disclosure option and embed latent disclosures by default

Large online platforms. These are public-facing social media, file-sharing, mass messaging and stand-alone search services that distribute content to users who did not create it or help create it, and that had more than 2,000,000 unique monthly users in the past 12 months. A mass messaging platform is a direct messaging service that lets users send content to more than 100 people at once. Broadband internet access and telecommunications services are excluded.

From January 1, 2027, under the text as AB 2713 rewrote it, such a platform has to detect any provenance data embedded in, attached to or otherwise associated with the content it distributes. Its interface must reliably show whether system provenance data or a digital signature identifies the content as generated or substantially altered by a GenAI system, or as captured by a capture device. It must also make clear whether provenance data and digital signatures are present, and which system or device made the content.

Users must be able to inspect the system provenance data in one of three ways. The platform can show it in that interface, link to a website or app that displays it (a third party's is fine), or let users download it in a format that cannot easily be attached to unrelated content. As far as technically feasible, it must not knowingly strip system provenance data or a digital signature from content uploaded to, distributed on or downloaded from it.

The platform does not have to keep, display or offer downloads of personal information. Nor does it need to act on data that is not compliant or interoperable with widely adopted specifications.

GenAI hosting platforms. These are websites or apps that offer a generative AI system's model weights or source code for download, paid or free, under a definition ending with the words "by a resident of the state". From January 1, 2027, they may not knowingly offer a GenAI system that fails to add the disclosures required by Section 22757.3, which after SB 1000 means the latent disclosure.

Capture device manufacturers. A capture device is anything that can record photos, audio or video, such as video and still cameras, phones with built-in cameras or microphones, and voice recorders. A capture device manufacturer is a person who makes such a device for sale in the state, not counting someone who only assembles them.

For devices first made for sale in the state on or after January 1, 2028, the manufacturer must let users choose to include a latent disclosure in captured content and must also embed latent disclosures by default. The optional disclosure gives the manufacturer's name, the device's name and version number, and the time and date of creation or alteration. The duty applies only as far as technically feasible and consistent with widely adopted specifications from an established standards body.

Summary: Check Public Access in California, Not User Numbers

With the user threshold gone and the exemption cut back to videogames, a GenAI service that once fell outside the Act because it was small, or because it offered streaming or film, now has to check again. The Act has applied since August 2, 2026, and SB 1000 changed it with immediate effect on September 30, 2026. A covered provider owes a latent disclosure, a free disclosure verification tool and the licensing steps.

Each violation costs $5,000 in civil penalties, and every day in violation counts separately for covered providers, large online platforms and capture device manufacturers. Large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms take on duties from January 1, 2027, and capture device manufacturers from January 1, 2028.

To see where your service stands, ask two questions: is it publicly accessible in California, and does it create or alter images, video or audio? The first decides covered provider status, and the second decides whether the disclosure and verification tool duties apply. All four bills are published in full on the California Legislature's website.