[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6569974,"mediaKeyId","3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10","parentId",3204341,"title","Committee advances bill requiring upfront disclosure of total rental‑car prices on merchant sites","audioSeconds",1244,"startMs",4731000,"endMs",5975000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10&start=4731&end=5975","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10/thumbnail_4731000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6569974/California/Committee-advances-bill-requiring-upfront-disclosure-of-total-rentalcar-prices-on-merchant-sites","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569974-5aff9a6999e8bc2b72c33e2c6fccf2a6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770895624&Signature=MtDC7TGAVr9hNXgUjDS7GPLcBu0fZY2qCNz2U2gP59dQrSUzDNUQaouDEVgh~INXjwB-VAinwY2UtzTTxO0IGymClAhHbpipORlM7QprdvWlXiLrDIZ-GtFJJZ52mhN2arvzk9DNVrAfTSGF5ypXxrFysJ8pzvqaAp7~-y3LLkzK0iQr3LBn2mhm1CQr2oDFSde1a6pTrHAncRj~32CGJoPzbu9NcjFJnhihHzcqZ-oIvp23Zm7hpYug3i47PdW7oZ1OeVoURCKXoFMqh-5q0BOOWzLddY3a7r7zY6RsqI4yzSOg2jQ3tglFTM88K6uv67WbVHSIP7Sf0gMCweOBuQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","California State Assembly","date","2025-05-06T00:00:00Z","article","Assemblymember Berman’s AB 1374 would require that, once a consumer selects rental dates, location and vehicle type, the merchant display an estimate of total charges—including taxes and mandatory fees—so consumers can make informed comparisons before completing a booking.

Berman said deceptive or hidden fees have frustrated consumers and that the bill builds on prior California work to require hotels to display full prices. The Consumer Federation of California presented a “secret‑shopper” review and screenshots showing instances where advertised prices grew substantially by the time of payment; the sponsor said in one example the total rose by more than $100 for a five‑day rental.

Enterprise and other industry witnesses opposed aspects of the bill as drafted, warning that changes to existing statutory language could invite litigation because California’s rental disclosure law includes a private right of action and established terminology such as “good faith estimate.” John Moffitt of Enterprise said existing disclosures generally comply with the law and urged clearer statutory definitions rather than broad rewording that could be redundant or ambiguous.

Committee members acknowledged the problem of surprise fees and encouraged continued negotiations. After questions and discussion the author accepted committee amendments and the bill was advanced; committee staff recorded the do‑pass‑as‑amended vote and reported the measure out of committee with the recorded tally.

Sponsors said the bill aims to protect consumers who must make budget‑sensitive choices and to extend transparent pricing obligations to third‑party sites that broker rentals; industry asked for clearer statutory terms to minimize litigation risk.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee (1)","oneSentenceSummary","AB 1374 would require rental‑car providers and third‑party sites to display the total estimated charges once a consumer selects dates, location and vehicle type. Supporters said the measure closes gaps that leave consumers surprised by added fees; industry called for clarifications to avoid litigation.","taxTitle","California State Assembly, House, Legislative, California","taxId",17099,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6569979,"Committee advances bill allowing limited geofencing and tightening rental‑car key rules to curb organized theft",620,4075000,4695000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10&start=4075&end=4695","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10/thumbnail_4075000.jpg","/articles/6569979/California/Committee-advances-bill-allowing-limited-geofencing-and-tightening-rentalcar-key-rules-to-curb-organized-theft","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569979-3b5eaa876054c0b90223bd01195f68b6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770895624&Signature=fEIvIvhQDkgATaaijANictPzYVc9Mz6~jixnQeymZon5jS6fVdR84zwIWqH2yaq6MtKv6CsqqDDBfjS754Pku5Sy~KK8bvYQ~mSJsA5RY2PM~xK8tvp6NuTVl1BjieuwkpAUY~O~OD7f3Hfvl8VuyFu9dOF7Io7GzqKbYzUnpPJnIp3MdBG~daTHQ-JeowgCTZpmsQWmn5oy9SRikeVPL4cPWCxYiNSix7JE9TkC1KZPYVEVNqPgSmQcVZ1VItmIwWget7Frj4iUmkyidDVMas4tbRKqbxx-soAZ1Dvob--zkHr-uw3ejuCY2QkzXk01zZEn7mK3qsh0IO5rufWdYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Calderon’s AB 1197, aimed at discouraging organized rental‑car theft and clarifying rental‑company recovery tools, advanced from the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee with committee amendments limiting location‑tracking tools to geofencing in narrow scenarios.

Calderon told the committee rental vehicles are frequent targets of theft and abandonment and said the bill would allow geofencing to detect movement outside the country when unauthorized and to locate vehicles abandoned in tow yards after a specified period. The author accepted an amendment to limit location‑based technology to geofencing and said the change balances recovery tools with privacy protections.

Industry witnesses for Enterprise, Hertz and Avis Budget described operational problems the bill seeks to address, including tow‑yard delays that generate sizable recovery fees and a statutory “keys” provision that some rental companies say has been exploited. John Moffitt of Enterprise explained that the bill clarifies financial responsibility when a renter returns the key and files a police report versus scenarios where a key is not returned.

The Consumer Federation of California supported the bill’s direction but raised concerns that geofencing could be used broadly around many impound lots and asked the committee to ensure the bill remains consumer‑protective. Committee members questioned practical scenarios—such as stolen purses containing keys—and the author and proponents said the bill preserves defenses where customers exercised ordinary care and adds a presumption of no liability where conditions are met (return of key, police report, cooperation).

After discussion the committee moved AB 1197 as amended; committee staff recorded the vote and reported the measure advanced. Sponsors said the approach targets bad actors while maintaining consumer protections; supporters and opponents agreed to continue technical discussions about implementation details.","AB 1197 would permit geofencing to locate rental vehicles in limited circumstances and adjusts liability presumptions tied to returned keys. The committee approved the bill as amended after debate on privacy, consumer protections and enforcement mechanics.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6569984,"Committee approves bill to make deleting social media accounts easier and to align deletion with CCPA rights",3141,3019000,6160000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10&start=3019&end=6160","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10/thumbnail_3019000.jpg","/articles/6569984/California/Committee-approves-bill-to-make-deleting-social-media-accounts-easier-and-to-align-deletion-with-CCPA-rights","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569984-3a5d7b182a73cb686233e84fdf19e890/orig.mp4?Expires=1770895624&Signature=TEcFdl4TYt~TIuel43isAcn~22zfZg6asjy6~ieNDtJ9K6m7AIFhmkAYBYIB-v55t4Mwiwkd-ThRuGlMTigwm2Sxw5o7YMTqW~evqNa22p7y7e6eIbr4KtIPQrY6vTKBFX6Ce-o~5CvJDyfPSXbGPVLPRJfcE3W3m9oNVQa1jz24forf328ywQdhpOmYWvq37EXfJcT4PXJ~FWl~y4f5oTG3h25djzehll1jIkcSu9vXKy3F-kgh4GxBHXdt~Xm8O0xixbxltQGx2DKNfULb1PeFfou~NNUabDfGFX1NiI54XoE1RzeF0K1P--2~TY0h91NbDk78mOlsl2C-o49wtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Schiavo’s AB 656, intended to simplify the process for Californians to delete social media accounts and remove personal information, advanced from the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee after the author accepted committee amendments.

The bill targets “dark patterns” and designs that make account deletion difficult, requiring platforms to surface a clear delete option in settings rather than burying it across multiple menus. The chair’s amendments narrowed the presentation requirement to a visible option within settings and aligned deletion of “personal information” with existing CCPA definitions and timelines.

Robert Hurrell of the Consumer Federation of California, sponsor of the bill, summarized the problem with screenshots and a “secret‑shopper” demonstration, arguing that some deletion workflows require more than 20 steps and that consumers should not have to navigate a “Kafkaesque nightmare.” Becca Kramer of Kaiser Advocacy and other consumer groups testified in support.

TechNet testified in respectful opposition, saying it continued to work with the author. Committee members raised practical concerns about accidental deletions and how deletion requests interact with platforms’ terms of service and existing CCPA timelines. The author and staff said the amendments were intended to harmonize the bill with the CCPA and limit new, separate timelines.

Committee members expressed bipartisan support for the amended approach. Assemblymember Ward and others described the changes as a workable middle ground that protects consumers without imposing onerous or visually intrusive UI requirements. The committee recorded a do-pass-as-amended vote; staff reported the committee vote as 9‑0 in favor.

If enacted, AB 656 would require social media platforms operating in California to provide an accessible account‑deletion pathway and to comply with CCPA deletion obligations when users request removal of their personal information. Supporters said the measure aims to reduce platform addiction and give consumers control over their digital footprints; opponents sought additional technical clarifications.","AB 656 would require platforms to make account deletion straightforward and to delete associated personal information consistent with the California Consumer Privacy Act. The committee approved the measure as amended after sponsors accepted changes to narrow some requirements.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6569989,"Assembly committee advances bill barring firms from blaming ‘autonomous’ AI for harms",2232,1968000,4200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10&start=1968&end=4200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204341-e8a2d75a9cdf1067db3d0ce2535a7b10/thumbnail_1968000.jpg","/articles/6569989/California/Assembly-committee-advances-bill-barring-firms-from-blaming-autonomous-AI-for-harms","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569989-3252dcb97b52766192f009226e393883/orig.mp4?Expires=1770895624&Signature=m0kyNtEfIMxbcjngOZlG5j7eN7lCaAbFatmXg30-yYxY54uFi0ul9BKymwP6--~LR~m6kWR1OMi2K~msHtu0EoCVGqTvnGSbclsd6Qrde2QdIfgvNgwYOj57LVQuZ271IeQ6c8nkroS60Op6aaaTgrOCWWLooprkJIDO-7Q9g8kEj7yQSsvxktIcZygxqBZaRT~0FPviZnM2HhFkdX74FFWhSW-w-EA7MzBqDIh06FvNnQ9QguAvyAfG4r2MMy-iGcX~NsdrR-C7gpg1lOt4lVr-xzvymzOapys7awX~jeDegG4tcaEA7BLYD8xs~3jVQYiQdY3FSl-Qvv4enmPtkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Krell’s AB 316, which the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee advanced on a do-pass vote, would bar defendants from claiming an AI system acted autonomously to avoid liability for harms tied to that technology.

The bill’s sponsor told the committee the measure does not create new theories of liability but instead prevents a defendant from using the autonomous nature of an AI system as a categorical defense. “This is a modest proposal that by providing guidance and a basic framework to our courts will both help AI fulfill its potential … and prevent unnecessary litigation,” Assemblymember Krell said.

Supporters stressed that the bill preserves plaintiffs’ existing burdens of proof while denying a potential “get out of jail free” argument. Ken Wang, senior policy advisor with the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy (a project of California Common Cause), said the bill “eliminates that possible defense” and noted courts still will require plaintiffs to prove duty, breach, causation and damages. Ed Howard of the Children’s Advocacy Institute described examples in which chatbots produced harmful, explicit prompts and urged passage, saying human creators should “take responsibility and accountability” for the systems they build.

Opponents—including TechNet, the California Chamber of Commerce and the Chamber of Progress—said existing tort law already addresses accountability and cautioned that AB 316, as drafted, could foreclose legitimate defenses such as foreseeability, design diligence or comparative fault. Robert Roeboykin of TechNet said the cases cited in support are not California rulings and argued courts are best positioned to sort negligence and causation in complex multi‑actor AI ecosystems. Ronak Delami of the CalChamber echoed concerns about unclear terms in the draft that could blur distinctions between developers, modifiers and downstream users.

Committee members asked clarifying questions about whether the bill would preserve traditional defenses; the author and supporters repeatedly said it would not change negligence or products‑liability standards, only that defendants could not shift blame solely to the AI’s autonomy. After discussion, a motion to move AB 316 out of the committee passed and was recorded by roll call; the committee left the roll open for members not present at the initial call. The committee reported the bill as approved (do pass) with the recorded tally indicated by committee staff.

AB 316 will next proceed through the Assembly’s legislative process for further committee consideration and potential floor action. Advocates for the bill said it provides early guardrails for accountability as AI systems proliferate; critics said lawmakers should refine definitions and exceptions to avoid unintended legal uncertainty.","The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee voted to move AB 316, a bill that would prevent defendants from asserting that AI acted autonomously to avoid liability. Supporters said the change clarifies accountability; opponents warned it could remove needed legal defenses and create uncertainty.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee advances bill requiring upfront disclosure of total rental‑car prices on merchant sites

Committee advances bill allowing limited geofencing and tightening rental‑car key rules to curb organized theft

Committee approves bill to make deleting social media accounts easier and to align deletion with CCPA rights

Assembly committee advances bill barring firms from blaming ‘autonomous’ AI for harms