CaliforniaDigital replicas would count in lawsuits over knowing ad use without consent
California's signed law says realistic digital copies of a person's voice or appearance count in lawsuits over knowing use in ads or sales without required consent.
What it does
Realistic digital copies of a person's voice or appearance would count in lawsuits over knowing use in products, ads, or sales without required consent. News, public affairs, sports coverage, and political campaigns are exempt.
Using a realistic digital copy with intent to pose as someone else would meet the false impersonation part of crimes that require it. Other requirements of those crimes would still apply.
Employers would lose the default assumption that failing to get consent was not knowing use when a worker's image appears incidentally in an ad or other publication. A claim would still require knowing use.
Argument forPeople may have a clearer path to sue over knowing use of their realistic digital copies in ads without required consent.
Argument againstEmployers may face more lawsuits over incidental worker images used without consent because they lose a default assumption about whether the use was knowing.
More detail
California would count realistic digital copies as a person's voice or appearance in these lawsuits. The claim covers knowing use in products, ads, or sales without the person's prior consent, or a parent or legal guardian's prior consent for a minor. The copy must be computer-made, highly realistic, and recognizable as the person. The person either did not appear or perform, or the character of their appearance or performance was materially changed. News, public affairs, sports coverage, and political campaigns do not require consent under this rule.
California would count use of a digital replica as a way to falsely impersonate someone. This applies to crimes in California's Penal Code that require proof of false impersonation. The person using the copy must intend to impersonate someone else. Other requirements of the crime still apply. The copy must be computer-made, highly realistic, and recognizable as the person's voice or appearance. The person either did not appear or perform, or the character of their appearance or performance was materially changed.
California would remove a default assumption that favored employers when they did not get consent to use a worker's image. This concerns a worker's photograph or appearance used incidentally by their employer in an ad or other publication when the worker is not essential to it. A claim would still require knowing use without the required prior consent.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed Assembly
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Sep 30Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 862, Statutes of 2026.Latest
- Sep 30Approved by the Governor Gavin Newsom.Became Law
- Sep 8Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.To Governor
- Aug 28In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.Minor
- Vote recorded SB 1111 Ashby Senate Third Reading By Bauer-Kahan. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 28Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 77. Noes 1. Page 6775.) Ordered to the Senate.Passed Assembly
- Aug 13Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 13From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 13).Minor
- Aug 13Assembly Rule 63 suspended.
- Aug 5August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
- Jul 1From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Minor
- Jun 30
- Vote recorded Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]. Result: pass.Lower
- Jun 17From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 14. Noes 1.) (June 16). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Jun 16
- Vote recorded Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Public Safety]. Result: pass.Lower
- May 18Referred to Coms. on P. & C.P. and PUB. S.Minor
- Apr 30In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.Minor
- Vote recorded 3rd Reading. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 30Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 4112.) Ordered to the Assembly.Passed Senate
- Apr 23Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Apr 22From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 3983.) (April 21).Minor
- Apr 21
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 14From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 8. Noes 1. Page 3843.) (April 13). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Apr 14Set for hearing April 21 in PUB. S. pending receipt.
- Apr 13
- Vote recorded Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Public Safety]. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 9Set for hearing April 13.
- Apr 8Re-referred to Coms. on P., D.T., & C.P. and PUB. S.Minor
- Mar 24Re-referred to Com. on RLS.Minor
- Mar 24Withdrawn from committee.Major
- Mar 23From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D.Major
- Feb 26Referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D.Minor
- Feb 18From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 20.
- Feb 17Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.Introduced
TechnologyAI & PrivacyCriminal Justice