Get email alerts on the Technology Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineers, hobbyists and industry warn AB 20 47 would impose unquantified DOJ costs and technical impossibility
Summary
A chorus of engineers, hobbyists and industry representatives told the committee AB 20 47’s intent‑detection and DOJ enforcement requirements would create unquantifiable state costs and rely on impractical technology; the committee placed the bill on the suspense file.
Opponents at the microphone described AB 20 47 as technically impracticable and fiscally risky. David Tobin, who identified himself as a local 3‑D printing industry practitioner, summarized the appropriations analysis and said enforcement would require DOJ to hire specialized personnel and acquire technological expertise not currently in DOJ’s scope. “The Appropriations Committee analysis just came back. It said the Department of Justice cost the staff to police this program are unquantifiable, and that requires ... the hiring of personnel and securing technological expertise outside the Department of Justice existing scope and capabilities,” Tobin said.
Multiple engineers, open‑source maintainers and industry participants echoed that reliably determining the function or intent of a 3‑D model is beyond current capabilities, warning of litigation exposure and burdens to courts and state agencies. The committee, with no additional members wishing to testify in opposition, moved AB 20 47 to the suspense file without objection.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
