Bill
AB 410
California AB 410 requires automated accounts and generative AI to disclose they're bots upfront, answer truthfully if asked, and avoid misleading users, with $1,000 per violation.
Note: The provided materials include two different bills both labeled “AB 410.” One (as amended in multiple committee reports) is a California bill by Assemblymember Wilson on bot disclosures (amendments to Business & Professions Code §§17940–17943). The other (“As Introduced”) is a bill revising the statutory definition of assault (NRS 200.471) that appears to be a Nevada draft. Below are concise, separate summaries of each, so readers can see the content and status of both measures.
1) AB 410 — Bot disclosure (California; Wilson) — summary
Purpose
- Update and clarify state law governing automated accounts (“bots”) and generative AI that communicate online, and require clear disclosure when interactions are not from humans.
Key provisions
- Redefines terms in Business & Professions Code §17940:
- “Artificial intelligence” — engineered/machine-based systems producing outputs that can influence environments.
- “Generative artificial intelligence” — systems that generate synthetic text, images, video, audio, etc.
- “Bot” — an automated online account or application that a reasonable person could believe is human and whose actions are substantially not the result of a human or are outputs of generative AI.
- “Online platform” — public-facing websites/apps with ≥10,000,000 unique monthly U.S. visitors for a majority of months in the prior year.
- Requires any person who uses a bot to autonomously communicate to ensure the bot:
1. Discloses when it first communicates that it is a bot (not a human).
2. Answers truthfully if asked whether it is a bot or human.
3. Refrains from attempting to mislead about its identity.
- Disclosure must be clear, conspicuous, and reasonably designed to inform users.
- Exempts situations where another law requires a more prescriptive disclosure scheme.
Enforcement and penalties
- Authorizes civil enforcement by the Attorney General, district attorneys, county counsels, city attorneys, or city prosecutors.
- Remedies: injunctive relief and civil penalties of $1,000 per violation.
Who is affected
- Operators and deployers of automated accounts and generative AI applications that interact with California users; online platforms meeting the size threshold; businesses using bots in commercial or political contexts.
Procedural / status
- Appears in multiple committee reports (Privacy & Consumer Protection, Appropriations, Judiciary). As of late August 2025, actions include referrals, amendments, and “held under submission” status. Fiscal committee review indicated.
2) AB 410 — Assault definition (Nevada; As Introduced) — summary
Purpose
- Amend the Nevada assault statute (NRS 200.471) to explicitly state that intentionally placing another person in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm includes making a threat of sexual violence.
Key provisions
- Amends NRS 200.471(1)(a)(2) to add, without limitation, that a threat of sexual violence constitutes the “reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm.”
- Defines “threat of sexual violence” as an oral or written threat to commit a sexual offense (referencing NRS 179D.097).
- Existing structure of the statute (definitions of officers, providers, penalties for assault — misdemeanor, felony B if deadly weapon, fines up to $5,000, etc.) remains in place; the amendment clarifies scope rather than changing penalties.
Who is affected
- Individuals charged with assault; victims and witnesses in cases involving threats of sexual violence; law enforcement and prosecutors applying assault statutes.
Procedural / status
- As Introduced, referred to Judiciary (March 2025). The provided materials also show legislative action notes, but a separate line in the record states: “(Pursuant to Joint Standing Rule No. 14.3.1, no further action allowed.)” — indicating the measure may have been blocked from further progress under that rule. Check the applicable legislative chamber’s docket for final disposition.
If you want, I can:
- Produce a side-by-side comparison of the California bot bill with existing federal or state proposals; or
- Draft a short one-page explainer focusing only on the assault amendment (Nevada) or only the bot disclosure bill (California).
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
