According to the California legislature, audio recordings, video recordings, and still images can be compelling evidence of the truth.  However, the proliferation of Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically, generative AI, has made it drastically easier to create fake content that is almost impossible to distinguish from authentic content.  To address this concern, California’s Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 942, which requires businesses that provide generative AI systems to make accessible tools to detect whether content was created by AI.

SB 942 defines “covered provider” as “a person [or business] that creates, codes, or otherwise produces generative artificial intelligence systems[, and] that has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users and is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of the state.”  Under SB 942, a covered provider must offer a publicly accessible AI detection tool at no cost. This tool allows users to assess whether the content was created or altered by AI and provides system provenance data (i.e., information explaining where the data originated) without revealing personal information.

Moreover, AI-generated content must include clear and conspicuous disclosures identifying it as such. Latent disclosures must also convey information about the content’s origin and authenticity, detectable by the AI detection tool.

While this law will not end the challenges employers face trying to discern deepfakes from reality,  it might help to avoid some critical missteps. Recall the disruption experienced by a school community, in particular its high school principal, in Pikesville, Maryland, when a recording suggested the principal made racially insensitive and antisemitic remarks. It took several months for the Baltimore County Police Department to investigate and conclude that the recording was a fake, a “deepfake,” generated by AI technology. The increased transparency that SB 942 could bring may have reduced or eliminated the flood of calls to the school, heightened security, and employment actions taken against the principal.

 Violations of the act can result in civil penalties of $5,000 per violation, enforceable by the Attorney General, city attorneys, or county counsels.  This means that certain California businesses that provide generative AI services should create a plan for implementing an AI detection tool that allows consumers to distinguish between AI versus human-created content.

Fortunately, technologies exist and are being developed to help organizations address these transparency issues. For example, the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) “addresses the prevalence of misleading information online through the development of technical standards for certifying the source and history (or provenance) of media content.” C2PA may be used to embed metadata into AI-generated content to help verify its source and other information.

 The requirements of SB 942 take effect January 1, 2026.

Tags: AI detection, California, deepfake, SB942, transparency
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Joseph J. Lazzarotti Joseph J. Lazzarotti

Joseph J. Lazzarotti is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He founded and currently co-leads the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group, edits the firm’s Privacy Blog, and is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP)…

Joseph J. Lazzarotti is a principal in the Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He founded and currently co-leads the firm’s Privacy, Data and Cybersecurity practice group, edits the firm’s Privacy Blog, and is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) with the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Trained as an employee benefits lawyer, focused on compliance, Joe also is a member of the firm’s Employee Benefits practice group.

In short, his practice focuses on the matrix of laws governing the privacy, security, and management of data, as well as the impact and regulation of social media. He also counsels companies on compliance, fiduciary, taxation, and administrative matters with respect to employee benefit plans.

Privacy and cybersecurity experience – Joe counsels multinational, national and regional companies in all industries on the broad array of laws, regulations, best practices, and preventive safeguards. The following are examples of areas of focus in his practice:

  • Advising health care providers, business associates, and group health plan sponsors concerning HIPAA/HITECH compliance, including risk assessments, policies and procedures, incident response plan development, vendor assessment and management programs, and training.
  • Coached hundreds of companies through the investigation, remediation, notification, and overall response to data breaches of all kinds – PHI, PII, payment card, etc.
  • Helping organizations address questions about the application, implementation, and overall compliance with European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and, in particular, its implications in the U.S., together with preparing for the California Consumer Privacy Act.
  • Working with organizations to develop and implement video, audio, and data-driven monitoring and surveillance programs. For instance, in the transportation and related industries, Joe has worked with numerous clients on fleet management programs involving the use of telematics, dash-cams, event data recorders (EDR), and related technologies. He also has advised many clients in the use of biometrics including with regard to consent, data security, and retention issues under BIPA and other laws.
  • Assisting clients with growing state data security mandates to safeguard personal information, including steering clients through detailed risk assessments and converting those assessments into practical “best practice” risk management solutions, including written information security programs (WISPs). Related work includes compliance advice concerning FTC Act, Regulation S-P, GLBA, and New York Reg. 500.
  • Advising clients about best practices for electronic communications, including in social media, as well as when communicating under a “bring your own device” (BYOD) or “company owned personally enabled device” (COPE) environment.
  • Conducting various levels of privacy and data security training for executives and employees
  • Supports organizations through mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations with regard to the handling of employee and customer data, and the safeguarding of that data during the transaction.
  • Representing organizations in matters involving inquiries into privacy and data security compliance before federal and state agencies including the HHS Office of Civil Rights, Federal Trade Commission, and various state Attorneys General.

Benefits counseling experience – Joe’s work in the benefits counseling area covers many areas of employee benefits law. Below are some examples of that work:

  • As part of the Firm’s Health Care Reform Team, he advises employers and plan sponsors regarding the establishment, administration and operation of fully insured and self-funded health and welfare plans to comply with ERISA, IRC, ACA/PPACA, HIPAA, COBRA, ADA, GINA, and other related laws.
  • Guiding clients through the selection of plan service providers, along with negotiating service agreements with vendors to address plan compliance and operations, while leveraging data security experience to ensure plan data is safeguarded.
  • Counsels plan sponsors on day-to-day compliance and administrative issues affecting plans.
  • Assists in the design and drafting of benefit plan documents, including severance and fringe benefit plans.
  • Advises plan sponsors concerning employee benefit plan operation, administration and correcting errors in operation.

Joe speaks and writes regularly on current employee benefits and data privacy and cybersecurity topics and his work has been published in leading business and legal journals and media outlets, such as The Washington Post, Inside Counsel, Bloomberg, The National Law Journal, Financial Times, Business Insurance, HR Magazine and NPR, as well as the ABA Journal, The American Lawyer, Law360, Bender’s Labor and Employment Bulletin, the Australian Privacy Law Bulletin and the Privacy, and Data Security Law Journal.

Joe served as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Laura Denvir Stith on the Missouri Court of Appeals.

Read more about Joseph J. Lazzarotti
Show more Show less
Related Posts
California Passes Legislation Protecting Performers’ Digital Rights
October 4, 2024
California Seeks to Have Consistent Definition of Artificial Intelligence
October 1, 2024
Investigation of AI Training by Australian Radiology Provider Provides Important Reminder for U.S. Healthcare Providers
September 26, 2024