CA SB11: Artificial intelligence technology.

In one paragraph

Vetoed. California's SB 11 would have required anyone offering consumers AI technology that can create a digital replica to post, by December 1, 2026, a warning that unlawful use to depict another person without consent may bring civil or criminal liability, with civil penalties up to $10,000 a day. It would also have counted digital replicas as a voice or likeness under the right-of-publicity law, treated impersonation by digital replica as false impersonation, and had the Judicial Council address AI-generated evidence by January 1, 2027. Vetoed by Governor Newsom October 13, 2025; veto sustained March 2, 2026.

Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.

What it means for business

None: the bill was vetoed and never became law. Providers of consumer AI tools that can create digital replicas would have had to post a liability warning by December 1, 2026, with penalties up to $10,000 a day.

Key provisions

1. 1Would have added Bus. & Prof. Code § 22650: by December 1, 2026, any person or entity making AI technology that lets users create a digital replica available to consumers must show the warning "Unlawful use of this technology to depict another person without prior consent may result in civil or criminal liability for the user."
2. 2The warning would be hyperlinked on any page or screen where the consumer enters a prompt and included in the terms and conditions, displayed clearly and conspicuously; not required for digital replicas used solely in video game play and not distributed outside the game
3. 3Civil penalty up to $10,000 for each day the technology is offered without the warning, enforced by the Attorney General, district attorneys, city attorneys, county counsel and other city or county prosecutors
4. 4Civil Code § 3344 (commercial use of name, voice or likeness without consent): a voice or likeness would include a digital replica as defined in § 3344.1, and the rebuttable presumption for incidental use of an employee's photo or likeness would have been removed
5. 5Evidence Code § 1425: by January 1, 2027, the Judicial Council would review AI's impact on the admissibility of evidence and develop any needed rules of court for claims that evidence was generated or manipulated by AI
6. 6Penal Code § 541: wherever false impersonation is an element of a crime (including §§ 528.5, 529 and 530), it would include using a digital replica with intent to impersonate another
7. 7Passed both houses September 13, 2025; vetoed by the Governor October 13, 2025; stricken from file and veto sustained March 2, 2026

Latest legislative action

Mar 2, 2026. Veto sustained.

Sponsors (showing 5 of 100)

Roll call votes (showing 3 of 11)