HomeAI LawsCaliforniaRiverside

AI Laws in Riverside, California

As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 64 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Riverside, California: 10+ federal protections, 54 California state-level rules (no Riverside-specific ordinances are indexed yet). Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, automated decision-making, AI disclosure and transparency, and deepfakes. 40 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Riverside local AI rules (and Riverside County)

No city- or county-specific AI ordinances are currently indexed for Riverside, California.

  1. Honest gap: We don't currently index any Riverside-specific AI ordinances. Federal and California state rules still apply throughout the city. Have we missed something? Email [email protected].

California-level AI rules most relevant to Riverside

54 California state rules apply to residents and businesses in Riverside. Showing the 8 most relevant to Riverside's local picture; 46 more are on the California jurisdiction page.

  1. In effect Stronger protection

    CCPA/CPRA + ADMT Regulations

    California · Effective 2026-01-01 · Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. tit. 11, div. 6

    California's main privacy law gives consumers rights to know, delete, correct, and opt out of the sale or sharing of their personal information. New regulations finalized in 2025 add rights around automated decision-making technology (ADMT): businesses using ADMT for significant decisions (jobs, housing, credit, healthcare) must give pre-use notice, let people opt out, and provide access to how decisions were made.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Stronger protection

    CA CPPA ADMT Regs

    CA · Effective 2026-04-01 · 11 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 7200-7232

    California's privacy agency finalized binding regulations governing automated decision-making and AI used to make significant decisions about Californians — including hiring, housing, education, healthcare, financial services, and ads to minors. Consumers gain rights to pre-use notice, opt-out, and access to information about how AI made the decision.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Limited protection

    CA Bar GenAI Guidance

    CA · Effective 2023-11-16 · State Bar of California, COPRAC Practical Guidance (Nov. 16, 2023)

    California lawyers using ChatGPT, CoPilot, or other generative AI tools must protect client confidentiality, verify AI-generated work, supervise AI outputs, disclose AI use where required, and avoid billing for time saved by AI. Misuse of generative AI is a discipline-eligible violation.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. Vetoed Unknown

    CA SB 1047 (vetoed)

    CA · Cal. SB 1047 (2023-24 Reg. Sess.) — vetoed Sept. 29, 2024

    California SB 1047 would have required safety testing, kill-switches, and developer liability for frontier AI models trained above compute/cost thresholds. Governor Newsom vetoed it on September 29, 2024 — a landmark veto that reshaped the U.S. frontier-AI policy debate.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. In effect Moderate protection

    CA AG Bonta

    CA · Effective 2024-01-26 · CA AG Bonta — CCPA Investigative Sweep of Streaming Services (2024-01-26)

    Sweep into streaming services' opt-out compliance; led to a $530K Sling TV settlement in 2025 and parallel CPPA actions (Honda $632,500) on ADMT-adjacent practices.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Moderate protection

    CPPA Honda ADMT settlement

    CA · Effective 2025-03-12 · CPPA, In re American Honda Motor Co. (Mar. 12, 2025)

    California's privacy agency fined American Honda $632,500 — its first public enforcement action — for making consumers go through hoops to exercise opt-out and access rights, including against automated decision-making and data-broker sharing. The agency signaled that ADMT (automated decision-making technology) compliance is now a top enforcement priority for AI-driven consumer profiling.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Moderate protection

    CA AB 1008 (CCPA + AI)

    CA · Effective 2025-01-01 · Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.140; AB 1008 (Stats. 2024, ch. 853)

    California clarified that personal information remains protected by the CCPA even when it is embedded in or generated by AI systems — including model weights and AI-generated synthetic content about a person. Closes a loophole AI developers had used to argue training data and model outputs fell outside privacy law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all 54 California AI rules →

Federal AI rules that apply in Riverside, California

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Riverside, California. 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 Riverside, California

Are there AI laws in Riverside, California?
Riverside, California does not have any city-specific AI ordinances indexed in our database. However, 54 California state-level rules and federal AI protections fully apply within the city limits. See the California jurisdiction page for the full state-level breakdown.
What federal AI rules apply in Riverside?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Riverside, California. 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 California have an AI privacy law?
California has 25 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including CCPA/CPRA + ADMT Regulations and California CRC rules (FEHA anti-bias law applied to AI hiring/employment tools). These apply to residents of Riverside.
Are deepfakes illegal in California?
California has 22 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including California AB 1836 (bans unauthorized AI digital replicas of dead performers) and California AB 2602 (vague AI voice/likeness contract clauses unenforceable). 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 Riverside?
Employer use of AI to screen job applicants in Riverside, California is governed by CCPA/CPRA + ADMT Regulations and California CRC rules (FEHA anti-bias law applied to AI hiring/employment tools). Federal civil-rights and EEOC guidance also applies.
How do I report an AI law violation in Riverside?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For California state laws, the California 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 Riverside?
Riverside, California has no facial-recognition-specific rule in our index. Use by private businesses is largely unregulated, while government use is governed by general Fourth Amendment and California law.
Is Riverside regulated by California's consumer privacy act?
Yes. California state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Riverside. See the California jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Riverside?

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