HomeAI LawsMassachusettsCambridge

AI Laws in Cambridge, Massachusetts

As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 18 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Cambridge, Massachusetts: 10+ federal protections, 7 Massachusetts state-level rules, and 1 local Cambridge ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, automated decision-making, AI-generated images, and government use of AI. 6 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Cambridge local AI rules (and Middlesex County)

1 local AI rule specific to Cambridge, Massachusetts or Middlesex County.

  1. In effect Moderate protection

    Cambridge Surveillance Ordinance & FR Ban

    Cambridge, MA · Enacted 2020-01-13 · Cambridge, Mass., Mun. Code ch. 2.128, FR ban amendment (Jan. 13, 2020)

    Cambridge requires City Council approval and impact reports before city departments use surveillance technology, and a unanimous January 2020 amendment banned city use of face surveillance. Surveillance impact reports were still being filed with the council in 2024–2025.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Massachusetts-level AI rules

7 Massachusetts state rules apply to residents and businesses in Cambridge. Sorted strongest first.

  1. In effect Moderate protection

    MA AG Campbell

    MA · Effective 2024-04-16 · MA AG Campbell — Advisory on Consumer Protection, Anti-Discrimination, Data Security and AI (2024-04-16)

    Clarifies that Chapter 93A, the Anti-Discrimination Law, and MA Data Security Regs apply fully to AI developers, suppliers, and users; identifies algorithmic discrimination and misrepresenting AI capabilities as unfair/deceptive.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Moderate protection

    MA AG

    MA · Effective 2025-07-10 · MA AG — $2.5M Earnest Operations Settlement (AI Underwriting Discrimination) (2025-07-10)

    Settlement with student-loan lender Earnest over allegations its AI underwriting model and 'Knockout Rule' produced disparate impacts on Black, Hispanic, and non-citizen applicants. Mandates AI governance, annual fair-lending testing, AG reporting.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Limited protection

    MA DOI AI Bulletin

    MA · Effective 2024-12-09 · Massachusetts Division of Insurance Bulletin 2024-10 (2024-12-09)

    The MA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in MA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Moderate protection

    MA EO 629

    MA · Effective 2024-02-14 · Mass. Exec. Order No. 629 (Feb. 14, 2024)

    Governor Healey's EO 629 creates a 26-member AI Strategic Task Force spanning government, labor, healthcare, finance, education, and life sciences to recommend AI policy for Massachusetts.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. In effect Limited protection

    MA Digitized Intimate-Images Law (deepfake NCII)

    Massachusetts · Effective 2024-09-18 · Acts of 2024, ch. 118 (H.4744), amending G.L. c. 265, Sec. 43A

    Massachusetts's 'An Act to Prevent Abuse and Exploitation' created a criminal offense for distributing nonconsensual intimate images and expressly extended it to 'visual material produced by digitization.' Digitization is defined to include creating or altering visual material — such as through computer-generated images — in a way that would falsely appear to a reasonable person to be an authentic depiction of the person shown. This brings AI-generated and digitally fabricated intimate images within the same prohibition that applies to real photos and videos.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. Proposed / pending Proposed or pending

    Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (Senate)

    Massachusetts · S 1174, 194th General Court of Massachusetts (2025-2026)

    Would close a gap in Massachusetts law by criminalizing the creation and distribution of sexually explicit images of children that are technologically edited, collaged, morphed, or AI-generated. Massachusetts is one of only five states that has not updated its child pornography statutes to cover AI-generated content. The bill aligns state law with statutes already enacted in 45 other states.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. Proposed / pending Proposed or pending

    Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (House)

    Massachusetts · H 1593, 194th General Court of Massachusetts (2025-2026)

    House companion to S 1174. Would update Massachusetts child pornography statutes to criminalize the creation, distribution, or possession of sexually explicit images of children that are AI-generated, morphed, or digitally edited. Would bring Massachusetts into alignment with 45 other states that already criminalize AI-generated CSAM under state law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Full Massachusetts jurisdiction page →

Federal AI rules that apply in Cambridge, Massachusetts

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Cambridge, Massachusetts. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.

  1. In effect Stronger protection

    Bartz v. Anthropic

    N.D. Cal. · Effective 2025-09-05 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)

    Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup issued a split ruling: training on lawfully purchased books was fair use, but ingesting pirated copies from LibGen was not. In September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement — the largest AI copyright recovery to date.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Stronger protection

    Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot)

    S.D. Fla. · Effective 2025-08-01 · Banner v. Tesla, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-21940 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2025)

    A Florida federal jury found Tesla 33% liable in August 2025 for the 2019 death of Naibel Benavides Leon, in a crash involving Autopilot. The verdict awarded $243M (later reduced to ~$220M) — the first Autopilot wrongful-death verdict against Tesla.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Stronger protection

    COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)

    United States · Effective 2025-06-23 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312

    COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Stronger protection

    TAKE IT DOWN Act

    United States · Effective 2025-05-19 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)

    Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. In effect Stronger protection

    Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)

    D.C. Cir. · Effective 2025-03-18 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)

    The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is constitutional and dispositive. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Stronger protection

    Thomson Reuters v. Ross

    D. Del. · Effective 2025-02-11 · Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence, Inc., 694 F. Supp. 3d 467 (D. Del. 2025)

    Thomson Reuters sued legal-research startup Ross Intelligence in 2020 for copying Westlaw headnotes to train a competing AI legal-research tool. In February 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by designation) granted summary judgment to Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement and rejected Ross's fair-use defense — the first definitive U.S. ruling on AI-training fair use. The 2023 jury trial verdict had been deadlocked; the 2025 ruling resolved liability.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Stronger protection

    Louis v. SafeRent

    D. Mass. · Effective 2024-11-20 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)

    SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. In effect Stronger protection

    NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)

    S.D. Ohio · Effective 2024-04-30 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 30, 2024)

    Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was permanently enjoined as unconstitutional in April 2024.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  9. In effect Stronger protection

    FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)

    United States · Effective 2024-04-01 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017

    The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  10. In effect Stronger protection

    TCPA (AI voice calls)

    United States · Effective 2024-02-08 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17

    Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all federal AI rules →

Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Cambridge, Massachusetts

Are there AI laws in Cambridge, Massachusetts?
Yes. We index 1 local AI rule that specifically apply in Cambridge, Massachusetts, including Cambridge Surveillance Ordinance & FR Ban. On top of that, 7 Massachusetts state-level rules and 10+ federal AI protections apply throughout the city.
What federal AI rules apply in Cambridge?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The highest-strength federal rules currently include Bartz v. Anthropic, Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot), COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data). 10+ federal entries are tracked in total.
Does Massachusetts have an AI privacy law?
Massachusetts has 3 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including MA AG Campbell and MA AG. These apply to residents of Cambridge.
Are deepfakes illegal in Massachusetts?
Massachusetts has 3 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including MA Digitized Intimate-Images Law (deepfake NCII) and Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (Senate). Additionally, the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act covers non-consensual intimate-image deepfakes nationwide.
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Cambridge?
Cambridge, Massachusetts has no AI-employment-screening-specific rule in our index. Federal Title VII, ADA, and EEOC guidance still apply, plus any general Massachusetts anti-discrimination statutes.
How do I report an AI law violation in Cambridge?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For Massachusetts state laws, the Massachusetts Attorney General's office is the usual starting point. For federal AI rules, file complaints with the relevant federal agency (FTC, EEOC, HUD, CFPB, etc.) named on each protection entry. We also accept tips at [email protected].
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Cambridge?
Facial-recognition use in Cambridge, Massachusetts is addressed by Cambridge Surveillance Ordinance & FR Ban. See those entries for what is allowed, who must comply, and enforcement details.
Is Cambridge regulated by Massachusetts's consumer privacy act?
Yes. Massachusetts state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Cambridge. See the Massachusetts jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Cambridge?

This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Cambridge ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.