In the US, a country that still lacks federal artificial intelligence (AI) legislation, states like Colorado and California are taking the lead to set their own state-wide regulations governing AI and related developments. California recently enacted two AI laws, Assembly Bill (AB) 2013 and Senate Bill (SB)-942 key, both of which take effect January 01, 2026. Additionally, the California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed SB-1047, also known as the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, on the grounds that it was not comprehensive and precise enough, with inappropriate focus on large models while ignoring the risks from smaller models.
AB 2013, also known as the AI Training Data Transparency Law, requires developers to post, on their websites, information regarding the data used to train their AI systems. The law is said to adopt a definition for AI that is also seen under other laws, such as the EU AI Act, Colorado’s AI law, and the recently passed California AI Transparency Act. It regulates generative AI, which can “generate derived synthetic content, such as text, images, video, and audio, that emulates the structure and characteristics of the artificial intelligence’s training data.” Developers are required to document information related to sources and owners of datasets, the intended purpose of the GenAI system, a description of the types of data used, IP considerations, and privacy considerations, among others. The requirements apply to systems or services released on or after January 01, 2022, including the systems released that are completely new or newer versions of existing systems.
SB-942, also known as the California AI Transparency Act, defines a “covered provider” as a person that creates, codes, or otherwise produces a GenAI system that has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users and is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of the state. This bill would, among other things, require a covered provider to make available an AI detection tool at no cost to the user that meets certain criteria, including that the AI detection tool is publicly accessible. It also requires the provider to include a manifest disclosure indicating that content is AI-generated. If a covered provider knows a third-party licensee modified a licensed GenAI system in a way that it is no longer capable of including the disclosures described herein in the content the system creates or alters, revoke the license within 96 hours of discovering the licensee’s action. It would also require a third-party licensee to cease using a licensed GenAI system after the license for the system has been revoked by the covered provider. As per the Act, covered providers violating various provisions within the Act would be liable for a civil penalty in the amount of USD 5,000 per violation to be collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel, as prescribed.
Related links
LEARN MORE
Find out how we can help
Moody’s brings together data, experience, and best practice capabilities, with our specialized and agile intelligence.