Assembly committee advances four consumer-related bills on AI training transparency, surveillance pricing, deepfakes and delivery refunds

The California State Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection on an organizational day heard testimony and advanced four bills that members and witnesses said aim to update consumer protections for a fast-changing digital economy.

Assemblymember Bauer Kehan’s AB 412, the AI Copyright Transparency Act, would create a mechanism for copyright holders to ask model developers whether a specific copyrighted work was included in datasets used to train generative AI models. ‘‘This is an incredibly simple bill that allows copyright owners to have a right to know when their copyrighted materials are used to train generative AI,’’ Assemblymember Bauer Kehan said as she introduced the measure. Supporters including Jolie Fisher, secretary-treasurer of SAG‑AFTRA, and Jay Jesima, co‑founder of the Transparency Coalition, told the committee creators currently lack reliable ways to learn whether their works were incorporated in training datasets. Fisher testified that "AI can't do anything on its own and no AI algorithm is able to make something out of nothing" and urged the panel to support disclosure mechanisms so creators can pursue remedies where appropriate. Developers and industry groups argued the proposal raises feasibility, preemption and implementation concerns and could advantage large firms, with speakers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the California Chamber of Commerce urging additional work on the bill’s technical approach.

On AB 446, Assemblymember Ward said the bill would ban ‘‘surveillance pricing’’ — using personal data or algorithmic profiles to charge different prices for the same good or service. Ward described practices she labeled predatory and discriminatory and said the bill would make it unlawful for businesses to use personal data when charging different prices for the same product or service. Supporters included consumer advocates such as Jamie Court of Consumer Watchdog and labor groups; business and trade associations including the California Chamber of Commerce and retail and grocery associations raised concerns about conflicts with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), exceptions for legitimate loyalty programs, and operational impacts on small businesses. The committee adopted amendments and advanced the bill to the Judiciary Committee.

AB 621, carried by Assemblymember Bauer Kehan and sponsored by the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, would strengthen civil enforcement against websites that create and distribute nonconsensual AI‑generated sexual imagery. A 17‑year‑old witness who said she had worked as a child actor testified about being the target of morphed images and described the lasting harms. Rebecca Krell of the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office said the bill would expressly apply civil liability to the operators and to those who knowingly or recklessly facilitate the operation of such “Nudify” sites, and would increase penalties and provide enforcement authority to public prosecutors.

AB 578, introduced from the dais in a personal account by Assemblymember Bauer Kehan, would require delivery‑platform operators to refund the original form of payment when an order is missing or incomplete and to prorate platform fees if only part of an order is delivered; the bill also includes provisions intended to ensure tips go to delivery workers and not to subsidize platform pay. Bauer Kehan described a personal incident in which she said she ordered 10 pizzas for a large party and received one pizza; she said the platform retained fees and issued only a credit rather than refunding her card. Delivery platforms and business groups signaled willingness to continue discussions about operational details, gratuity handling and fraud prevention.

Votes at a glance - AB 412 (Bauer Kehan) — AI Copyright Transparency Act: motion recorded in committee as “due pass as amended to the Judiciary Committee.” The transcript records the motion being called; final roll call tallies were not clearly resolved on the record in the provided transcript and are marked below as "not specified." (See provenance.) - AB 446 (Ward) — Surveillance pricing ban: passed as amended to the Judiciary Committee (committee vote recorded in transcript; roll call resulted in a majority in favor; committee advanced the bill). - AB 621 (Bauer Kehan) — Civil enforcement against nonconsensual AI sexual imagery: passed as amended to the Judiciary Committee (committee advanced the bill; the transcript records roll call in favor). - AB 578 (Bauer Kehan) — Delivery-app refunds and tip protections: passed as amended out of committee (the motion was called and advanced on committee vote).

Why it matters: Committee members described the bills as efforts to update California consumer protections for harms tied to rapidly evolving digital technologies — from creators’ inability to determine whether their copyrighted works were used in AI training, to algorithmically produced price differences, to the proliferation of nonconsensual AI sexual imagery, and to practical consumer problems on delivery platforms. Several members urged continued negotiation with industry and other stakeholders to resolve feasibility concerns and to avoid unintended consequences.

What’s next: Each bill was advanced to the Assembly Judiciary Committee for further consideration; authors and multiple stakeholders said they will continue negotiating technical fixes and implementation details. The transcript records a mix of bipartisan support and cross‑bench concerns that the measures be refined to avoid conflicts with existing law or undue burdens on small businesses.

Sources: Committee hearing transcript, testimony and roll calls as recorded in the hearing record.