California: what the rules say

Copyright in the United States is federal law. Whether training a model on a work was lawful is decided under the federal Copyright Act, not under California law — see United States: what the rules say. What follows is only what California law adds, from the provisions as read on 2026-09-27. Rules differ by place and change over time. This is background, not legal advice — for anything turning on a deadline or a particular court, ask a qualified professional where you live.

USCA01 | What must a developer publish about training data?

Civil Code sections 3110–3111 require a developer of a generative artificial intelligence system or service to post on its website documentation of the data used to train the system. The documentation must include a high-level summary of the datasets: their sources or owners, how the datasets further the system's intended purpose, the number of data points (general ranges allowed, estimates for dynamic datasets), the types of data points, whether the datasets include material protected by copyright, trademark, or patent or are entirely in the public domain, whether they were purchased or licensed, whether they include personal information or aggregate consumer information, what cleaning or processing was done and why, the time period of data collection, the dates the datasets were first used in development, and whether synthetic data generation was used.

Applies when: The system or service, or a substantial modification to it, was released on or after January 1, 2022 and is made publicly available to Californians. Posting is due on or before January 1, 2026 and again before each later public release or substantial modification. "Developer" covers anyone who designs, codes, produces, or substantially modifies such a system for use by the public.

Exceptions and defences: Systems whose sole purpose is ensuring security and integrity, operating aircraft in the national airspace, or national security, military, or defense purposes where the system is made available only to a federal entity are excluded. The statute calls for a high-level summary, not a list of individual works or authors, and it creates no opt-out or removal right.

Related material: E30 (SOP02), E31 (SOP02)

Source: [S01] §§3110–3111

USCA02 | How can AI-generated images, video, or audio be identified?

The California AI Transparency Act requires a covered provider — a person that creates, codes, or otherwise produces a generative AI system with over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users, publicly accessible within California — to make available at no cost an AI detection tool for image, video, or audio content created or altered by its system; to offer users the option of a clear, conspicuous, hard-to-remove manifest disclosure identifying content as AI-generated; and to include a latent disclosure in AI-generated image, video, or audio content carrying the provider's name, the system name and version number, the date and time of creation or alteration, and a unique identifier, in a form detectable by the provider's detection tool and consistent with widely accepted industry standards. A provider that licenses its system to a third party must require by contract that the licensee keep the disclosure capability, and must revoke the license within 96 hours of learning the licensee disabled it.

Applies when: The chapter became operative on January 1, 2026. The duties attach to covered providers as defined above, including their third-party licensees.

Exceptions and defences: The chapter does not apply to products, services, websites, or applications providing exclusively non-user-generated video game, television, streaming, movie, or interactive experiences. Civil penalties of $5,000 per violation are pursued by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel. The detection and disclosure duties cover image, video, and audio — not text — and the chapter says nothing about training data.

Related material: E14 (SOP02), E17 (SOP02), E23 (SOP03)

Source: [S02] §§22757–22757.6

USCA03 | What does the older right-of-publicity statute cover?

Civil Code section 3344 makes any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising, selling, or soliciting purchases of products, merchandise, goods, or services, without that person's prior consent, liable for damages: the greater of $750 or the actual damages suffered, plus any attributable profits not taken into account in computing actual damages, with punitive damages and attorney's fees also available. A party may also seek an injunction or temporary restraining order, and a court order to remove, recall, or otherwise cease publication or distribution of the name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness must be carried out within two business days of service. The section does not use the term "digital replica."

Applies when: The use is on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for advertising, selling, or soliciting purchases, and is knowing and without prior consent (or parental consent for a minor).

Exceptions and defences: Uses in connection with news, public affairs, or sports broadcasts or accounts, or political campaigns, do not require consent. Owners or employees of an advertising medium are not covered unless they knew of the unauthorized use. Whether a synthetic likeness of a living person counts as that person's "likeness" is not spelled out in the text.

Related material: E01 (SOP06), E04 (SOP01), E08 (SOP06)

Source: [S03] §3344(a)–(g)

USCA04 | What about digital replicas of people who have died?

Section 3344.1 provides that a person who produces, distributes, or makes available the digital replica of a deceased personality's voice or likeness in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording, without prior consent of the person entitled to give it, is liable for the greater of $10,000 or the actual damages suffered by the person controlling the rights. "Digital replica" is defined as a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation, readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual, embodied in a sound recording, image, audiovisual work, or transmission in which the individual did not actually perform or appear, or in which the fundamental character of the performance or appearance was materially altered. The rights are transferable property rights lasting 70 years after death; damages for uses occurring before the rights holder registers a claim with the Secretary of State cannot be recovered.

Applies when: The replica is of a deceased personality — a person whose name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness had commercial value at or because of death — used in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording without the required consent, for acts occurring in California.

Exceptions and defences: Consent is not required for uses in news, public affairs, or sports broadcasts or accounts; comment, criticism, scholarship, satire, or parody; documentary, historical, or biographical representations unless they create the false impression of an authentic recording the individual participated in; fleeting or incidental uses; or advertisements for those works. No action lies for uses occurring more than 70 years after death.

Related material: E01 (SOP06), E08 (SOP06), E43 (SOP06)

Source: [S04] §3344.1(a)

USCA05 | What must a services contract say about digital replicas?

Labor Code section 927 provides that a provision in an agreement for the performance of personal or professional services, allowing the creation and use of a digital replica of the individual's voice or likeness in place of work the individual would otherwise have performed in person, is unenforceable as it relates to a new performance fixed on or after January 1, 2025, where the provision lacks a reasonably specific description of the intended uses and the individual was represented neither by legal counsel who negotiated the digital-replica licensing terms (with the commercial terms stated clearly and conspicuously in a signed or initialed writing) nor by a labor union whose collective bargaining agreement expressly addresses digital-replica uses.

Applies when: The agreement is for personal or professional services, the replica would stand in for work the individual would otherwise have performed in person, and the performance is new and fixed on or after January 1, 2025.

Exceptions and defences: Only the offending provision is unenforceable; the rest of the contract, including exclusivity grants, is unaffected. A missing specific description does not make the provision unenforceable where the uses are consistent with the services contract and the fundamental character of the recorded photography or soundtrack.

Related material: E08 (SOP06), E10 (SOP06)

Source: [S05] §927

USCA06 | What will change for synthetic performers in advertising?

From January 1, 2027, Business and Professions Code section 17610 will make it unlawful for any person to create and cause to be published, in an advertising medium, an advertisement that prominently includes a synthetic performer without a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the advertisement includes a synthetic performer. A "synthetic performer" is a digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part with generative AI that creates the realistic impression of the audio, audiovisual, or visual performance of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable natural person. The disclosure will have to use wording substantially similar to "this performance features a synthetic performer" or "no human performer is depicted." A violation will constitute a violation of section 17500 and will be enforceable under the unfair competition law.

Applies when: From January 1, 2027, to advertisements disseminated in California that prominently feature a synthetic performer — in the foreground demonstrating the product or service, voicing the commercial message, or illustrating or reacting to it.

Exceptions and defences: The section will not restrict the creation, distribution, or exhibition of synthetic content itself, only its undisclosed prominent use in advertising. It will not apply to advertisements for expressive works (motion pictures, television, streaming content, documentaries, video games, and similar works) where the synthetic performer's use is consistent with the work, nor where generative AI was used solely for language translation or accessibility features. A use depicting a recognizable, identifiable real person falls outside this section's definition and remains under the right-of-publicity statutes.

Related material: E13 (SOP02), E17 (SOP02), E23 (SOP03)

Source: [S06] §17610 — takes effect January 1, 2027

USCA07 | Does the state privacy law reach creative work?

The California Consumer Privacy Act gives California residents rights over their "personal information" — information that identifies, relates to, describes, or is reasonably capable of being associated with, or could reasonably be linked to, a particular consumer or household — held by businesses meeting statutory thresholds: annual gross revenue over $25 million, annually buying, selling, or sharing the personal information of 100,000 or more consumers or households, or deriving half or more of annual revenue from selling or sharing personal information. Since AB 1008 (2024), the statute states that personal information can exist in abstract digital formats, including artificial intelligence systems capable of outputting personal information. The state's privacy regulations are adopted and enforced through the California Privacy Protection Agency.

Applies when: The information is personal information of a California resident held by a covered business. The definition turns on whether the information is linkable to a particular consumer or household — not on whether it is a creative work.

Exceptions and defences: The statute reaches personal data about the requester, not the work as such; a privacy request is not a mechanism the text provides for pulling a work out of a model. Deidentified information and aggregate consumer information are excluded from personal information.

Related material: E43 (SOP06)

Source: [S07] §1798.140(c),(v); [S08] CPPA regulations

Sources

• [S01] AB 2013 (2024), Ch. 817 — Generative artificial intelligence: training data transparency | locators: Civ. Code §§3110–3111 | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S02] SB 942 (2024), Ch. 291 — California AI Transparency Act | locators: Bus. & Prof. Code §§22757–22757.6 | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S03] Civil Code §3344 (CA), as amended by SB 683 (2025), Ch. 590 | locators: §3344(a)–(g) | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S04] AB 1836 (2024), Ch. 258 — Use of likeness: digital replica | locators: Civ. Code §3344.1(a) | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S05] AB 2602 (2024), Ch. 259 — Contracts against public policy: digital replicas | locators: Lab. Code §927 | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S06] SB 1050 (2026), Ch. 246 — False advertising: synthetic performers | locators: Bus. & Prof. Code §17610 (takes effect January 1, 2027) | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S07] California Consumer Privacy Act, Civ. Code §§1798.100 et seq.; §1798.140 as amended by AB 1008 (2024) | locators: §1798.140(c),(v) | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: selected_text_read | confirmed as current full text: no | leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
• [S08] California Privacy Protection Agency — Laws & Regulations | checked: 2026-09-27 | access: page_read | cppa.ca.gov