Edits to California Automated-Decisions Bill Fail to Satisfy Industry
Despite major changes in a California bill on automated decision systems (ADS), the Business Software Alliance (BSA) still urged lawmakers to slam the brakes on AB-1018 on Wednesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-2 Tuesday to advance the measure to the Appropriations Committee. AB-1018, which would make rules for developers and deployers of automated decision systems, previously passed the Assembly (see 2506030029).
"BSA urges California to reverse course on AB 1018,” Craig Albright, senior vice president of U.S. government relations, said in a statement. “Recent amendments did not change that the bill remains a sweeping and flawed attempt to regulate [AI] that misunderstands how AI is built and deployed.”
“AB 1018 imposes rigid mandates on a broad range of businesses that develop and create tools with AI,” said Albright. “It unwisely requires them to conduct performance evaluations and risk assessments for downstream uses they have no visibility into or control over. … The result is unworkable regulation that creates more confusion than clarity and ultimately harms AI development and adoption.”
Prior to Tuesday’s vote, Assembly Privacy Committee Chair Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D), the bill’s author, agreed to multiple amendments. One “completely remove[s] the right of subjects of ADS decisions to opt out, as well as rework the pre-use notice provision to only require a generalized notice, not one personalized for each subject,” said a Judiciary Committee staff analysis.
Also, a proposed auditing requirement for developers will be delayed until 2030 “to allow the relevant market to take shape,” it said. “The requirement for developers to conduct performance evaluations will be limited to no more than once a year.”
Plus, the legislation's author agreed “to completely remove the auditing requirements for deployers to reduce the burden on deployers, despite the benefits of having this layer of oversight,” the analysis said.
Additionally, Bauer-Kahan agreed to narrow the list of public prosecutors who would be able to enforce the proposed law, it said.