California Joins New York in Requiring Disclosure of Synthetic Performers in Advertising

On September 16, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed , making California the second state after New York to require advertisers to tell consumers when an ad includes a synthetic performer. The law takes effect January 1, 2027.

California covers much of the same ground as New York, which took effect June 9, 2026. But there are meaningful differences, two of which warrant particular attention: California reaches audio-only advertising, and it only applies when a synthetic performer is used prominently—a term California uniquely defines.

What the Law Requires

SB 1050 makes it an unlawful advertising practice to create and publish an audio, video or audiovisual advertisement that “prominently” includes a “synthetic performer” without a clear and conspicuous disclosure.

A “synthetic performer” is a “digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part using generative artificial intelligence (AI) that creates the realistic impression of the audio, audiovisual, or visual performance of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable natural person.” As in New York, California targets wholly fictional digital humans, not digital replicas of real people. California already regulates those separately under , protecting individuals against unauthorized digital replicas of their voice or likeness, and , which limits when performers can be contractually bound to the use of their digital replicas.

Unlike New York, California tells you how and what to disclose. It must be “difficult to miss, easily understandable, and presented in a manner that a reasonable consumer would notice, read, and comprehend,” using language substantially similar to “this performance features a synthetic performer” or “no human performer is depicted.” That is a welcome contrast to New York, which requires a “conspicuous” disclosure that a synthetic performer is in the ad but does not define how the disclosure should be made.

Where California Goes Further than New York and Where It Pulls Back

Audio is in—in California only. California applies to audio, video and audiovisual advertisements, so radio, podcasts and streaming audio using an AI-generated voice are squarely covered. New York does not reach audio-only ads. Its definition of a synthetic performer is limited to programs creating the impression of an “audiovisual and/or visual performance,” and audio-only advertising is expressly excluded.

“Prominently” is a real limit and a defined one. New York arguably requires disclosure whenever a synthetic performer appears at all. California only requires disclosure when the synthetic performer appears “prominently,” which the statute defines as being “[i]n the foreground and demonstrating or illustrating the product or service,” “[p]roviding or voicing the on- or off-camera narration or commercial message,” or “[i]llustrating or reacting to the on- or off-camera narration or commercial message.” Background or incidental figures, like an AI-generated extra walking through a shot, probably won’t trigger the disclosure obligation.

Another notable difference is that New York’s obligation attaches only where the advertiser has “actual knowledge” that a synthetic performer is in the ad. California includes no such qualifier, so “our agency didn’t tell us” is likely not a strong defense.

How It Will Be Enforced and Against Whom

The two laws also take different approaches to enforcement, which may result in different levels of litigation exposure for advertisers.

New York imposes civil penalties of $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for each subsequent violation, with no express private right of action.

California instead folds violations of the law into its existing false advertising and unfair competition statutes. These statutes do not allow statutory penalties for consumer lawsuits and require that consumers plead and prove they suffered damages as a result of the false or unfair act. However, because those are the same statutes that drive a lot of California consumer class actions, advertisers face a realistic risk of private litigation that the New York law does not present.

California also likely reaches further down the distribution chain. New York expressly exempts media platforms and publishers that merely host ads. California does too, up to a point, but once a court finds an ad unlawful and issues an order, streaming services, broadcasters, online platforms and publishers served with that order must stop distributing the ad in California “as soon as commercially reasonable and technically feasible” and must stop accepting payment to run it. Platforms aren’t required to pre-screen, but they can’t ignore a court order either.

What This Means for Businesses

With New York already live and California effective January 1, 2027, advertisers running national campaigns should consider taking the following steps:

• Take stock of what you already have running. Review current and in-progress campaigns that use AI-generated human-like performances, excluding digital twins, including commercials and other video ads, print ads, catalogs, digital ads, billboards, and radio ads, and commercial messages in podcasts and other audio ads.
• Ask the question up front, in writing. New York only gets you where the advertiser has actual knowledge; California drops that qualifier entirely, so you can’t rely on not knowing or a contractual prohibition in agency agreements.
• Use California’s language to fill New York’s gap. California is the only one of the two laws that tells you what to say: “this performance features a synthetic performer” or “no human performer is depicted,” or something similar.
• Watch the trend line. SAG-AFTRA sponsored both statutes and has now moved essentially the same framework through two legislatures in ten months, with the signings held at union offices in each state. That’s a tested model, and there’s no reason to expect it to slow down. Other states may take up similar bills, probably drafted from the same template. In the meantime, advertisers should review synthetic-performer campaigns under three separate frameworks: New York law, California law and, where applicable, the SAG-AFTRA Commercials Contract.