Three AI bills were passed in California, USA, where Silicon Valley is located on Tuesday, mainly focusing on regulating misinformation in elections and artist portrait rights. The controversial SB 1047 bill is still on the governor's desk, as the governor stated that a more careful evaluation is needed.
On Tuesday, California, USA, where Silicon Valley is located, witnessed the introduction of three new AI legislations. California Governor Newsom has signed these three local bills respectively.
One of the legislations stipulates that creating and publishing false news related to elections within 120 days prior to the election and 60 days after will constitute a violation of the law. The court is empowered to stop the spread of this material and impose civil penalties on the parties involved.
In addition, major social media platforms must remove deceptive materials, and political campaign organizations are required to disclose whether they have placed AI-altered advertisements on the platforms.
According to Governor Newsom, these measures will help combat harmful practices such as deepfakes in political advertisements and other content, and they are part of California's active efforts to cultivate a transparent and credible AI environment.
The other two legislations aim to protect the rights of artists and ordinary individuals, including the right to portrait, intellectual property rights, and protect them from AI infringement.
Balancing Risks
California's AI legislation undoubtedly has a profound impact and serves as a benchmark in the US industry. The US Actors' Guild, non-profit advocacy groups, and several well-known actors have openly supported Newsom and the legislative actions of the California government.
Actor Mark Ruffalo has expressed that large technology companies in Silicon Valley and billionaires do not want to see the emergence of AI legislation, which prompts everyone to discuss the reasons behind it. AI is unstoppable, but people do not know what the final outcome will be.
Although Newton has passed three AI bills, he still hesitates on another more heavyweight AI legislation, which is the SB 1047 bill that has triggered collective opposition from the AI industry. It stipulates that if an AI company fails to take necessary security measures and its technology subsequently causes significant harm, the company will be held legally responsible.
Newton stated that there are several AI-related bills awaiting his signature, but he is concerned that the enactment of inappropriate legislation may cause irreversible damage to California's competitiveness in the coming years.
He further stated that California has a first-mover advantage in the field of AI, and he does not want to lose this leading position, so he is weighing whether the risks of AI will develop as expected.
At this stage, Newton is more eager to implement regulations that are more targeted than the SB 1047 bill, and the aforementioned three bills that he has signed are representative of those regulations.
Editor/ping