State legislatures have passed new laws focused on disclosing the use of AI in advertisements or depictions of individuals. On September 16, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 1050, a new law requiring disclosures when certain advertisements prominently feature a “synthetic performer.” This was one of several AI-related measures signed by Governor Newsom this year, which we summarized in our prior blog post.
- SB 1050: California SB 1050 will prohibit a person from creating and causing to be published in an advertising medium an advertisement that “prominently” includes a “synthetic performer,” unless the advertisement contains a clear and conspicuous disclosure. The law defines “synthetic performer” as a digital figure, voice, or representation created, in whole or in part, using generative artificial intelligence that creates the realistic impression of the audio, audiovisual, or visual performance of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable natural person. The disclosure obligation will only apply when the synthetic performer appears “prominently,” which the text clarifies means a person in the foreground and demonstrating or illustrating the product or service, or providing or voicing, or illustrating or reacting to, the on- or off-camera narration or commercial message. A violation of these requirements would qualify as a violation of California’s false advertising laws. The law will enter into effect January 1, 2027.
- California’s law closely resembles New York’s synthetic performer disclosure statute, codified at N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 396-b. The New York law similarly requires advertisers to provide a clear and conspicuous disclosure when a synthetic performer is used in an advertisement.
- Hawaii’s Approach: Unlike California SB 1050, which focuses on AI transparency and disclosures for synthetic performers who are not recognizable as an identifiable person, Hawaii’s new statute focuses on the unauthorized use of realistic digital imitations of identifiable individuals. Hawaii considered a similar disclosure-based framework for synthetic performers in the originally introduced version of the bill, but the state ultimately enacted a law that instead prohibits a person from knowingly publishing a realistic digital imitation of an identifiable individual without that individual’s consent when the imitation is used in connection with advertising, causes harm, or is used to facilitate fraud, defamation, harassment, or other unlawful conduct.
Companies using generative AI in marketing and advertising should evaluate whether their advertisements trigger state-specific disclosure obligations and consider the requirements of existing consumer protection laws such as the FTC Act. Check back here for more updates in state regulation of AI-generated advertising and content.