Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the AI Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts AI 'bill of rights' substitute targeting companion chatbots, parental controls and bot disclosure
Summary
A Senate substitute for SB 482 was adopted to establish consumer protections for minors and vulnerable adults interacting with generative AI, including companion‑chatbot disclosure and parental controls, periodic break reminders, and procurement limits tied to foreign entities; industry witnesses raised privacy and age‑verification concerns.
Senators adopted a substitute for SB 482, an artificial intelligence bill of rights that sets baseline consumer protections for children and vulnerable adults and establishes constraints on certain AI uses by state contractors and education providers.
Sponsor Senator Leake said the measure focuses on companion chatbots and other generative AI that can appear to form relationships with users, and described requirements that platforms hosting companion bots must prevent minors from opening or retaining accounts without parental consent, periodically remind minors to take breaks, and disclose that the interlocutor is artificially generated. The substitute also requires parental notice before school use of certain AI tools and gives the Department of Legal Affairs enforcement authority for consumer protections with enhanced penalties for violations involving minors.
Industry witnesses said they appreciate the sponsor’s outreach and some changes in the strike‑all but raised practical concerns about age verification and collection of sensitive identity information. Adam Bassler of Associated Industries noted that requiring parental verification could force companies to collect and retain large amounts of personally identifiable data and create new privacy and cybersecurity risks: "Complying with these provisions means collecting a ton of ID... creating large databases of high value personal data," he said. Other witnesses including child‑safety advocates supported the measure as a state‑level safeguard while noting implementation challenges.
The committee adopted the substitute amendment and reported the bill favorably; sponsors and stakeholders signaled willingness to continue technical work as the bill proceeds.
