Existing unfair competition laws make various unfair competition practices unlawful, including any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising. Existing law makes it unlawful for any person doing business in California and advertising to consumers in California to make any false or misleading advertising claim. Existing law makes a person who violates specified false advertising provisions liable for a civil penalty, as specified, and provides that a person who violates those false advertising provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Existing law makes it unlawful for healing arts licensees, as specified, to disseminate or cause to be disseminated any form of public communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement, claim, or image in order to induce the provision of services or products in connection with their licensed professional practice or business. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions punishable as a misdemeanor and, in the case of a licensed person, provides that a violation constitutes unprofessional conduct and grounds for suspension or revocation of a license by the relevant board.

This bill would, subject to specified exceptions, would require a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes the image, audio, or video of a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person health care provider depicted in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence and or that no human health care provider is depicted. The bill would also define terms for its purposes.

This bill would provide that a violation of its provisions constitutes a violation of specified unfair competition and false advertising laws. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a natural person whose digital replica is used in an advertisement to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions, and provisions. The bill would provide specify that a violation of the bill does not constitute a misdemeanor. misdemeanor under provisions regulating healing arts licensees.

Existing law makes it unlawful for any person doing business in California and advertising to consumers in California to make any false or misleading advertising claim.

Existing law makes it unlawful for healing arts licensees, as specified, to disseminate or cause to be disseminated any form of public communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement, claim, or image in order to induce the provision of services or products in connection with their licensed professional practice or business. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions punishable as a misdemeanor and, in the case of a licensed person, provides that a violation constitutes unprofessional conduct and grounds for suspension or revocation of a license by the relevant board.

This bill would, subject to specified exceptions, require a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that uses includes the image, audio, or video of a person representing themselves to be, or identifiably depicting a person as, digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider. no human health care provider is depicted. The bill would also define terms for its purposes and would provide for factors that may be considered in determining whether a natural person is identifiably depicted in an electronic representation. purposes.

This bill would authorize the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a natural person identifiably depicted as a health care provider whose digital replica is used in an advertisement to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions, and would provide that a violation of the bill does not constitute a misdemeanor.

Existing law makes it unlawful for any person doing business in California and advertising to consumers in California to make any false or misleading advertising claim.

Existing law makes it unlawful for healing arts licensees, as specified, to disseminate or cause to be disseminated any form of public communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement, claim, or image in order to induce the provision of services or products in connection with their licensed professional practice or business. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions punishable as a misdemeanor. misdemeanor and, in the case of a licensed person, provides that a violation constitutes unprofessional conduct and grounds for suspension or revocation of a license by the relevant board.

This bill would would, subject to specified exceptions, require an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person representing themselves to be, or identifiably depicting a person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence. intelligence and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider. The bill would also define terms for its purposes. purposes and would provide for factors that may be considered in determining whether a natural person is identifiably depicted in an electronic representation.

This bill would require actions for relief brought pursuant to this bill to be prosecuted exclusively by authorize the Attorney General or General, a district attorney in the name of the people of the State of California, attorney, or a natural person identifiably depicted as a health care provider in an advertisement to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions, and would provide that a violation of the bill does not constitute a misdemeanor.

Existing law makes it unlawful for any person doing business in California and advertising to consumers in California to make any false or misleading advertising claim.

Existing law makes it unlawful for healing arts licensees, as specified, to disseminate or cause to be disseminated any form of public communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement, claim, or image in order to induce the provision of services or products in connection with their licensed professional practice or business. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions punishable as a misdemeanor.

This bill would require an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence. The bill would also define terms for its purposes.

This bill would require actions for relief brought pursuant to this bill to be prosecuted exclusively by the Attorney General or a district attorney in the name of the people of the State of California, and would provide that a violation of the bill does not constitute a misdemeanor.

Date of Hearing: August 5, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1146

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:June 11, 2026

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires an advertisement that depicts an artificial intelligence-generated health care provider promoting a health-related consumer product or service to disclose the use of artificial intelligence.

More specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider, to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service, to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the health care provider depicted was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence, or that no human health care provider is depicted.
2. Provides that a violation constitutes a violation of the False Advertising Law and may be enforced pursuant to the Unfair Competition Law (UCL).
3. Grants a natural person whose digital replica is used in a violating advertisement a civil action against the person who created the advertisement, and permits that person to seek any appropriate remedy, including injunctive relief.
4. Specifies that the remedies provided are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies provided by law, including the right of publicity under Section 3344 of the Civil Code.
5. Specifies that a violation does not constitute a misdemeanor for purposes of the article, and provides that a person is not authorized to use an individual’s digital replica for commercial purposes without consent.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Court workload cost pressures of an unknown amount, likely minor to moderate (Trial Court Trust Fund (TCTF), General Fund), to adjudicate actions brought under the UCL and civil actions brought by persons whose digital replicas are used without the required disclosure and by public prosecutors. Actual costs will depend on the number of cases filed and the amount of court time needed to resolve each case. It generally costs approximately $1,000 to operate a courtroom for one hour. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased pressure on the Trial Court Trust Fund may create a demand for increased funding for courts from the General Fund. The state budget provides annual General Fund backfills to the Trial Court Trust Fund to offset revenue reductions, totaling approximately $117.3 million in 2025-26.
2. Costs of an unknown amount, likely minor and moderate, to the Department of Justice (DOJ) to the extent the Attorney General brings enforcement actions under the UCL (Consumer Protection Fund, General Fund). Actual costs will depend on whether the Attorney General pursues investigations and enforcement actions, and, if so, the level of additional staffing DOJ needs to handle the related workload. If DOJ does not pursue investigation or enforcement as authorized by this bill, the department would likely not incur any costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not… This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice.

The author states that consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit.

1. Background. Generative artificial intelligence has made it substantially easier to produce convincing synthetic audio and video. Two distinct forms are addressed by this bill. A digital replica is a realistic representation of an identifiable individual, in which the individual either did not perform or appear, or did so but the fundamental character of the performance has been materially altered. A synthetic performer is an AI-generated figure that does not correspond to any identifiable natural person. Both have appeared in online health advertising. According to the Assembly Judiciary Committee analysis, reporting has documented AI-generated depictions of medical professionals promoting unproven products, including a video imitating a University of California, San Francisco endocrinologist to advertise a weight-loss product, produced without the physician’s knowledge or consent. Existing regulation prohibits an advertisement from falsely describing a person as a physician, and federal regulation requires that an advertised endorser represented as an expert in fact possess that expertise. Existing law does not require an advertisement to disclose that a depicted health care provider is not a real person. This bill fills that gap by requiring disclosure rather than prohibiting the underlying conduct.
2. Related Legislation. SB 1050 (Ashby) similarly requires disclosure when generative artificial intelligence is used in advertisements and, as amended, expressly excludes violations of this bill to avoid duplicative liability. SB 1050 is pending in this committee.
3. Prior Legislation. AB 489 (Bonta), Chapter 615, Statutes of 2025, prohibited artificial intelligence systems from misrepresenting themselves as licensed or certified health care professionals.

Analysis Prepared by: Shiran Zohar / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 23, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Ash Kalra, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1146

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:June 11, 2026

SENATE VOTE: 36-0

SUBJECT: ADVERTISEMENT CLAIMS: HEALTH-RELATED CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES: DIGITAL REPLICAS AND SYNTHETIC PERFORMERS

SYNOPSIS

The development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers significant potential to enhance California’s economy and improve residents' lives by rapidly generating text, images, and audio. However, these advancements come with new concerns. Recent reporting has shed light on the use of GenAI to falsely depict medical professionals endorsing or promoting suspect and unproven health products. The false or inappropriate medical advice offered by these GenAI medical professionals, can cause real harm to individuals. Relying on inaccurate advice can lead to unforeseen physical reactions from the promoted products or cause people to not seek the treatment they really need. This bill would require any advertisement that uses a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care professional and that advertises a health-related product or service, to clearly disclose the use of artificial intelligence.

This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association, supported by a variety of medical professional organizations, and has no registered opposition. The bill previously passed unanimously out of the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection.

SUMMARY: Requires any advertisement for a health product or service that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to portray a healthcare provider in the advertisement, to disclose the use of AI. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the health care provider depicted in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI or that no human health care provider is depicted.
2. Provides that a violation of the bill is a violation of the False Advertising Law (FAL), enforceable pursuant to the Unfair Competition Law (UCL).
3. Grants a private right of action for a person whose digital replica is used in an advertisement that violates the requirement set forth in 1) and may seek injunctive relief and any appropriate remedy.
4. Specifies that the remedies under the bill are cumulative and are in addition to any other remedies provided by law.
5. Clarifies that a violation of 1) shall not constitute a misdemeanor.
6. Defines the following terms:
7. “Artificial intelligence” means an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.
8. “Clear and conspicuous disclosure” means a disclosure that is difficult to miss, easily understandable, and presented in a manner that a reasonable consumer would notice, read, and comprehend, taking into account the medium, format, and context in which the advertisement appears.
9. “Digital replica” means a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual that is embodied in a sound recording, image, audiovisual work, or transmission in which the actual individual either did not actually perform or appear, or the actual individual did perform or appear, but the fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered. “Digital replica” does not include the electronic reproduction, use of a sample of one sound recording or audiovisual work into another, remixing, mastering, or digital remastering of a sound recording or audiovisual work authorized by the copyrightholder.
10. “Generative artificial intelligence” means an artificial intelligence system that can generate derived synthetic content, such as text, images, video, and audio, that emulates the structure and characteristics of the artificial intelligence system’s training data.
11. “Health-related consumer product or service” means a product or service that is marketed for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and is marketed as having a health benefit. Examples include, but are not limited to, dietary supplements and medical and dental goods and services.
12. “Health care provider” means a person licensed under Business and Professions Code Section 650.01.
13. “Synthetic performer” means a digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part using generative artificial intelligence, that creates the realistic impression of an audiovisual or visual performance of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable natural person.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the UCL, which provides a statutory cause of action for any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, including over the internet. (Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et seq.)
2. Defines “unfair competition” to mean and include any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and any act prohibited by the False Advertising Law. (Business and Professions Code Section 17200.)
3. Establishes the FAL, which proscribes making or disseminating any statement that is known or should be known to be untrue or misleading with intent to directly or indirectly dispose of real or personal property. (Business and Professions Code Section 17500 et seq.)
4. Establishes the California AI Transparency Act, which becomes operative on August 2, 2026, and requires certain “covered providers” to make an AI detection tool available at no cost by which a person can assess whether content was created or altered by the provider’s GenAI system. (Business and Professions Code Section 22757 et seq.)
5. Requires a covered provider to offer users the option to include in AI-generated image, video, or audio content created by its own generative AI system a manifest disclosure that meets specified criteria, including that it identifies the content as AI-generated content. (Business & Professions Code Section 22757.3 (a).)
6. Requires a covered provider to include in AI-generated image, audio, and video content created by its generative AI system a latent disclosure that is detectable by the tool specified above and is, to the extent technically feasible, permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove. (Business and Professions Code Section 22757.3 (b).)
7. Requires a large online platform, starting January 1, 2027, to do the following:
8. Detect whether any provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body is embedded into or attached to content distributed on the large online platform.
9. Provide a user interface to disclose the availability of system provenance data that reliably indicates that the content was generated or substantially altered by a GenAI system or captured by a capture device. The user interface shall make clearly and conspicuously available to users information sufficient to identify the content’s authenticity, origin, or history of modification, including specified information such as whether provenance data is available.
10. Allow a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body in an easily accessible manner by any of several specified means. (Business and Professions Code Section 22757.3.1.)
11. Provides that violators of the above provisions are liable for a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 per violation to be collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel. Each day of a violation is deemed a discrete violation. (Business and Professions Code Section 22757.4.)
12. Provides remedies for individuals who have suffered damages as a result of fraud or deceit, including situations involving fraudulent misrepresentations. (Civil Code Sections 1572-1573, 1709-1710.)
13. Establishes California’s right of publicity law, which provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. (Civil Code Section 3344 (a).)
14. Provides that any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on a website or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Penal Code Section 528.5.)
15. Provides that every person who falsely impersonates another in either their private or official capacity, and in that assumed character carries out specified actions, is punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Penal Code Section 529.)
16. Prohibits an advertisement for a person who is not a physician from using the terms "medical", "physician", or "doctor"; nor a term describing a specific area of medical practice such as "surgeon", "osteopath", "psychologist", "chiropractor", "podiatrist", "dentist", "optometrist", etc.; nor their linguistic variants; nor any similar designation implying that the person is a physician; in the advertiser's name or to describe the advertiser's services. In addition, an advertisement for a person who is not licensed as a physician in the specific area of medical practice named in the advertisement may not include a term describing a specific area of medical practice. (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title 8 Section 9823.)
17. Provides, pursuant to federal law, that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances. (U.S. Const., amend. I.)
18. Requires, pursuant to federal law, an advertisement whenever it represents, expressly or by implication, that the endorser is an expert with respect to the endorsement message, that the endorser’s qualifications must in fact give the endorser the expertise that the endorser represents as possessing with respect to the endorsement. (16 C.F.R. Section 255.3.)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS: The development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers significant potential to enhance California’s economy and improve residents' lives by rapidly generating text, images, and audio. However, these advancements come with new safety concerns. Artificial intelligence, broadly speaking, involves computers mimicking human intelligence through algorithms that process various inputs into outputs, such as text or video. While image manipulation and video doctoring have long existed, the advent of GenAI, in combination with the abundance of open sourced GenAI tools available, has drastically simplified these processes, enabling the creation of convincing fake content with minimal effort. GenAI’s ability to generate realistic imagery, video, and audio can pose significant risks when used maliciously that can harm individuals.

Recent reporting has shed light on the use of GenAI to falsely depict medical professionals endorsing or promoting suspect and unproven health products. (Steven Lee Myers et al., The Doctors Are Real, but the Sales Pitches are Frauds, N.Y. Times (Sept. 5, 2025) available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/technology/ai-doctor-scams.html.) One such example, is Dr. Rober H. Lustig, an endocrinologist and professor at UC San Francisco, who was made—via GenAI—to appear as though he was selling “liquid pearls” in ads appearing on Facebook. (Ibid.) A CBS News investigation uncovered dozens of accounts on various social media sites where generative AI doctors—some using the names of real doctors—were selling products or giving advice. (Alex Clark, Deepfake videos impersonating real doctors push false medical advice and treatments, CBS News (Aug. 14, 2025) available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/deepfake-videos-impersonating-real-doctors-push-false-medical-advice-treatments/.) According to recent findings, the false or inappropriate medical advice offered by GenAI, can cause real harm to individuals. (Ron Goldberg, Trust in AI-Generated Medical Advice May Cause Harm, Data Suggest, Cancer Therapy Advisor (July 2, 2025) available at: https://www.cancertherapyadvisor.com/news/trust-in-ai-generated-medical-advice-may-cause-harm-data-suggest/.) Researchers found that participants often preferred medical advice from GenAI, even though it was less accurate. (Ibid.) Relying on inaccurate advice can lead to people not seeking the treatment they really need. According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not. Unfortunately, with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake content. This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice. In a single month, one investigation found more than 100 such videos circulating across social media platforms, misleading viewers on important health and safety topics. Consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit. SB 1146 responds to this threat by requiring any health product or service advertisement that uses the image, audio or video of a natural person that is AI generated to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the content was produced using AI. By empowering Californians with the transparency they need to make informed decisions about their health, SB 1146 is a critical step toward protecting vulnerable consumers from deceptive AI-driven advertising and preserving the integrity of trusted medical information.

Although there are regulations in place that prohibit advertisements from falsely depicting a person as a physician who is in fact not a physician, existing law does not require advertisements to disclose if a depicted health care provider is not only not a doctor, but not a real person. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8 Section 9823; 16 C.F.R. Section 255.3.)

This bill would require a person who creates an advertisement that includes a synthetic performer or digital replica depicted as a health care provider and is promoting the sale of a health-related product or service, to include a “clear and conspicuous” disclosure that the depicted health care provider was generated—or substantially altered—by artificial intelligence. A synthetic performer is a digital figure that is generated by AI, but not readily identifiable as a natural person. A digital replica, on the other hand, is a realistic representation of an identifiable individual where the performance of the identifiable individual has either been altered or created as a whole.

A violation of this bill would be considered a violation of the False Advertising Law, and enforceable under the Unfair Competition Law. The UCL allows for injunctive relief and civil penalties as a means of enforcement. (Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et seq.) This bill also provides a private right of action for anyone whose digital replica was used in an advertisement that did not contain the required disclosure. The likely remedy would be an injunction to remove the advertisement; however, the bill states that its remedies are cumulative to existing remedies, and therefore, a person who brings an action would likely be able to also bring an action for a violation of their right to publicity.

SB 1050 (Ashby), which will be heard in this Committee, would similarly require a disclosure when GenAI is used in advertisements. However, SB 1050 now specifically includes a carve out for a violation of this bill, preventing the potential for liability under both bills.

Commercial Speech. The First Amendment provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (U.S. Const., amend. I.) While commercial speech is a type of content-based restriction, and content-based restrictions ordinarily receive strict scrutiny analysis under the First Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment accords commercial speech lesser protection than other constitutionally guaranteed expression. This is in part because, unlike other varieties of speech, speech proposing a commercial transaction occurs in an area traditionally subject to governmental regulation. (Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Service Commission (1980) 447 U.S. 557, 562-63.) Ultimately, the First Amendment prohibits commercial speech against “unwarranted” governmental regulation.

The U.S. Supreme Court has articulated a four-prong test by which commercial speech regulations are evaluated for constitutionality. This test asks: (1) whether the expression concerns lawful activity and is not misleading; (2) whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial; (3) whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted; and (4) whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to achieve that interest. (Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp., supra, 447 U.S. at pp. 561-66.)

Here, on the first prong, the activity at question, synthetic performers or digital replicas depicted as health care providers and promoting health-related products or services, appears to be misleading on its face. These are not doctors, nurses or dentists endorsing a product. They are AI generated performers. On the second prong, the important government interest is to protect consumers from the false impression a health product is supported by a licensed health care provider, when in fact it is not. This interest is quite substantial, as people trust medical professionals for health advice and as discussed above, relying on inaccurate information can lead to real health risks. Here, regarding the third prong, the regulation is to include a disclosure that the performers were created using AI. This regulation advances the governmental interest, because it provides the viewer of the advertisement with the information that the performer advocating for the product is not a real person. Lastly, for the fourth prong, the regulation does not appear to be more extensive than necessary to achieve the government’s interest. The bill does not prohibit the use of synthetic performers or digital replicas as health care providers; it simply requires a disclosure of the use of AI. Therefore, the bill would likely survive a First Amendment challenge.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association (CMA) and supported by a variety of medical groups, including the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California. CMA writes in support:

On behalf of more than 50,000 physician and medical student members, the California Medical Association (CMA) is proud to sponsor SB 1146 by Senator Lena Gonzalez to address the growing misuse of artificial intelligence to clone physicians’ likenesses and voices, without their knowledge or consent, to sell unproven supplements and "miracle cures" and dispense baseless medical advice. SB 1146 establishes simple, commonsense transparency requirements for advertisements for health-related consumer products or services. If the ad uses the image, audio, or video of a person generated or substantially altered by AI, they must include a clear and conspicuous disclosure informing consumers that the content was created using AI.

Advances in artificial intelligence have created new opportunities for innovation, but it is also easier than ever for bad actors to generate convincing “deepfake” images, audio, and video that falsely portray physicians endorsing products or providing medical advice. These AI-generated impersonations are increasingly being used to promote unproven supplements, “miracle cures,” and other health-related products online. Often, scammers clone real physicians’ faces or voices, without their knowledge or consent.

These scams exploit the trust that patients place in physicians and can expose consumers to misleading health information and potentially harmful products. Deepfake “doctors” are garnering millions of views online while promoting non-FDA-approved treatments and dubious medical devices. Patients, particularly older adults and individuals with chronic conditions, are often targeted with deceptive claims, leading them to waste money on ineffective products or delay seeking legitimate medical care.

By requiring clear disclosures when AI is used to generate or significantly alter a person’s likeness or voice in health-related advertising, this bill will help consumers better recognize manipulated content and make informed decisions about their health. The bill also provides enforcement authority to the Attorney General to hold bad actors accountable, ensure consistent oversight, and prevent abuse of the law.

Importantly, SB 1146 does not restrict legitimate innovation or the responsible use of artificial intelligence in health care or other sectors. Instead, it draws a clear line against deceptive commercial practices that misappropriate physicians’ identities and put patients at risk.

The California Dental Association writes in support:

The California Dental Association, representing 27,000 members throughout the state, writes in support of SB 1146 (Gonzalez), which would require an advertisement of a health-related consumer product or service that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person that is generated or significantly altered using artificial intelligence, to include a clear and obvious disclosure that the advertisement was generated by AI.

With the rise of AI and Generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate between real and fake content. This is particularly true with the rise of deepfake “doctors” online, garnering views endorsing a variety of health-related products relying on the goodwill of medical and dental professionals. The use of artificial intelligence in advertising health related products raises concerns, particularly when it comes to accuracy, ethics, and consumer protection. While AI can be used to tailor messages to specific audiences, this same personalization can also lead to the spread of misleading and incomplete health information. As a result, consumers may be influenced by purchasing products that are ineffective, unnecessary, or even harmful.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Medical Association (CMA) (sponsor)
American Academy of Pediatrics, California
American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists - District IX
Board of Registered Nursing
California Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
California Dental Association
California Dermatology Advocacy Network
California Orthopedic Association
California Podiatric Medical Association
California Radiological Society
California Society of Pathologists
Dental Board of California
Kaiser Permanente
Medical Board of California
San Francisco Marin Medical Society
University of California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Griff Ryan-Roberts / JUD. / (916) 319-2334

Date of Hearing: June 16, 2026

Fiscal:

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1146

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:June 11, 2026

SENATE VOTE: 36-0

SUBJECT: Advertisement claims: health-related consumer products and services: digital replicas and synthetic performers

SYNOPSIS

The capacity of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) to create synthetic but authentic-seeming content at scale has left virtually no sector of the economy untouched. One particularly concerning manifestation of this problem is a proliferation of GenAI content portraying medical professionals, both fake and real, hawking dubious medical products and services online.

This bill, sponsored by the California Medical Association, requires advertisements with digital replicas (digital versions of actual humans) or synthetic performers (AI-generated characters that don’t correspond to an actual human) that are depicted as a health care provider who is promoting a health-related service or product to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure indicating that the health care provider is AI generated. Violations constitute false advertising, enforceable pursuant to the Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The bill also grants a private right of action for a person whose digital replica is used without a disclosure.

The bill is supported by various medical trade associations and has no registered opposition.

If passed by this Committee, the bill will re-referred to the Judiciary Committee.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Defines:
   1. “Artificial intelligence” as an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments. (Civ. Code § 3110(a).)
   2. “Digital replica” as a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual that is embodied in a sound recording, image, audiovisual work, or transmission in which the actual individual either did not actually perform or appear, or the actual individual did perform or appear, but the fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered. “Digital replica” does not include the electronic reproduction, use of a sample of one sound recording or audiovisual work into another, remixing, mastering, or digital remastering of a sound recording or audiovisual work authorized by the copyright holder. (Civ. Code § 3344.1.)
   3. “Generative artificial intelligence” as artificial intelligence that can generate derived synthetic content, such as text, images, video, and audio, that emulates the structure and characteristics of the artificial intelligence’s training data. (Civ. Code § 3110(c).)
2. Provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for the purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, is liable for statutory damages, actual damages, lost profits, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs. (Civ. Code § 3344(a).)
3. Beginning August 2, 2026, requires a covered provider to include a latent disclosure in AI-generated image, video, or audio content, or content that is any combination thereof, created by the covered provider’s GenAI system that, to the extent technically feasible and reasonable, conveys the name of the covered provider, the name and version number of the GenAI system that created or altered the content, the time and date of the content’s creation or alteration, and a unique identifier, either directly or through a link to a permanent internet website. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3.)
   
4. Beginning January 1, 2028, requires a capture device manufacturer to, with respect to any capture device the capture device manufacturer first produced for sale in the state on or after January 1, 2028, provide a user with the option to include a latent disclosure in content captured by the capture device, and to embed latent disclosures in content captured by the device by default. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3.3.)
5. Establishes the False Advertising Law (FAL), which proscribes making or disseminating any untrue or misleading statements in connection with advertisements. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 et seq.)
6. Establishes the UCL, which provides a statutory cause of action for any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.)
7. Regulates healing arts licensees, including false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statements, claims, or images disseminated by licensees to induce the provision of services or products in connection with their professional practice or business. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 651.)

THIS BILL:

1. Incorporates the existing definitions of “artificial intelligence,” “generative artificial intelligence,” and “digital replica”.
2. Defines:
   1. “Clear and conspicuous disclosure” as a disclosure that is difficult to miss, easily understandable, and presented in a manner that a reasonable consumer would notice, read, and comprehend, taking into account the medium, format, and context in which the advertisement appears.
   2. “Health-related consumer product or service” as a product or service that is marketed for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and is marketed as having a health benefit.
   3. “Synthetic performer” as a digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part using generative artificial intelligence, that creates the realistic impression of an audiovisual or visual performance of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable natural person.
3. Requires a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the health care provider depicted in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI or that no human health care provider is depicted.
4. Provides that a violation of the bill is a violation of the FAL, enforceable pursuant to the UCL.
5. Grants a private right of action for a person whose digital replica is used in an advertisement that violates the requirement set forth in 3) and may seek injunctive relief and any appropriate remedy.
6. Specifies that the remedies under the bill are cumulative and are in addition to any other remedies provided by law.

COMMENTS:

1) Author’s statement. According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not. Unfortunately, with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake content. This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice. In a single month, one investigation found more than 100 such videos circulating across social media platforms, misleading viewers on important health and safety topics. Consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit. SB 1146 responds to this threat by requiring any health product or service advertisement that uses the image, audio or video of a natural person that is AI generated to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the content was produced using AI. By empowering Californians with the transparency they need to make informed decisions about their health, SB 1146 is a critical step toward protecting vulnerable consumers from deceptive AI-driven advertising and preserving the integrity of trusted medical information.

2) Background. GenAI. AI refers to the mimicking of human intelligence by artificial systems such as computers.^[1] AI uses algorithms – sets of rules – to transform inputs into outputs. Inputs and outputs can be anything a computer is able to process: numbers, text, audio, or video, for example. AI is not fundamentally different from other computer functions; unlike other computer functions, however, AI is able to accomplish tasks that are normally performed by humans.

Most modern AI tools are created through a process known as “machine learning,” which enables AI tools to learn relationships between inputs and outputs without being explicitly programmed.^[2] The process of exposing a naïve AI to data is known as “training.” The algorithm that an AI develops during training is known as its “model.” At its core, training is an optimization problem: machine learning attempts to identify model parameters – weights – that minimize the difference between predicted outcomes and actual outcomes. During training, these weights are continuously adjusted to improve the model’s performance. Once trained, the model can process new, never-before-seen data.^[3]

Models trained on small, specific datasets in order to make recommendations and predictions are sometimes referred to as “predictive AI.” This differentiates them from generative AI (GenAI) which are trained on massive datasets in order to produce detailed text, images, audio, and video.^[4] When ChatGPT generates text in clear, concise paragraphs, it uses GenAI that has been trained on the written contents of the internet.^[5] When Netflix suggests content to a viewer, its recommendation is produced using predictive AI that has been trained on the viewing habits of Netflix users.^[6]

Digital replicas. Technological advances have had major implications for likeness rights. The term “digital replicas” is used to describe computer-generated avatars of an individual’s likeness—including their face, body, voice, movement; indeed, their very identity—that can appear authentic but be manipulated to create entirely new “performances,” even if the actor had no active role in the making of the performance. For example, James Dean, despite passing away over 60 years ago, was cast in a 2019 movie using a digital replica.^[7]

Meanwhile, “[a]spiring musicians, actors, and models routinely sign predatory blanket, long-term (sometimes perpetual) assignments and licenses of their publicity rights as a condition of getting representation, a record deal, a role, or a photo shoot,” writes Professor Jennifer Rothman, a leading scholar on the issue. “Similarly, the NCAA has had student-athletes sign contracts as a condition of participation in college athletics that the NCAA claimed assigned to it the perpetual rights to those students’ names and likenesses for use in any context.”^[8]

Concerns regarding the use of artificial intelligence in the entertainment industry played a major role in the 2023 strike by writers and performers that brought Hollywood to a standstill. After months of negotiations with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, SAG-AFTRA ratified an agreement that, among other things, “establishes detailed informed consent and compensation guardrails for the use of AI, hair and makeup equity, meaningful protections for the casting process, sexual harassment prevention protections and more.”^[9]

Last session, two bills enacted protections related to digital replicas in the entertainment industry. AB 2602 (Kalra, Stats. 2024, Ch. 259) deemed unenforceable contractual provisions governing digital replicas that (1) do not sufficiently delineate the uses of the digital replica, or (2) for which the performer lacked proper representation, either by an attorney or labor union representative. Additionally, to prevent the unauthorized reanimation of dead celebrities, AB 1836 (Bauer-Kahan, Stats. 2024, Ch. 258) established a specific cause of action for beneficiaries of deceased celebrities for the unauthorized use of a digital replica of the celebrity in audiovisual works or sound recordings.

Synthetic performers. In contrast to digital replicas, synthetic performers do not correspond to any particular human being. The most prominent example is “Tilly Norwood,” a fully AI-generated synthetic “actress” created in 2025. Tilly has a social media following, was signed by a talent agency, profiled in The New York Times, and has featured in multiple advertisements and videos. Her creator hailed her as the next Scarlett Johansson or Natalie Portman.^[10]

Backlash from Hollywood has been swift. SAG-AFTRA stated “‘Tilly Norwood’ is not an actor . . . It’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers - without permission or compensation.”^[11] SAG-AFTRA’s most recent agreement with the studios establishes “a principle strongly favoring human performances” and bars the use of synthetic performers unless they bring “significant additional value” to a production.^[12] Producers must notify and bargain with SAG-AFTRA before deploying a synthetic performer; if no agreement is reached, the union may arbitrate.^[13]

Deepfake healthcare ads. According to a recent article, the use of AI performers to promote healthcare products online has become rampant:

AI is easier than ever to produce and as a result, ads with AI talking heads that claim to be medical experts are infiltrating social media’s robust wellness ecosystem. This isn’t isolated to one app. On Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok, a particular kind of AI health video — one that uses an AI avatar to convince people of medical expertise — has become the defacto way for accounts to convince people that they, and their unproven products, are legit. Unlike AI images from just a few years ago, many of these videos feature a combination of real footage and AI, which results in avatars who look extremely lifelike at first glance — and are edited exactly the same as direct to camera content that’s popular on video apps.^[14]

In some cases, digital replicas of actual doctors have been used without the doctor’s consent or knowledge:

Dr. Robert H. Lustig is an endocrinologist, a professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, and an author of best-selling books on obesity.

He is absolutely not — despite what you might see and hear on Facebook — hawking “liquid pearls” with dubious claims about weight loss. “No injections, no surgery, just results,” he appears to say in one post.

Instead, someone has used artificial intelligence to make a video that imitates him and his voice — all without his knowledge, let alone consent.

The posts are part of a global surge of frauds hijacking the online personas of prominent medical professionals to sell unproven health products or simply to swindle gullible customers, according to the doctors, government officials and researchers who have tracked the problem.

While health care has long attracted quackery, A.I. tools developed by Big Tech are enabling the people behind these impersonations to reach millions online — and to profit from them. The result is seeding disinformation, undermining trust in the profession and potentially endangering patients.^[15]

3) What this bill would do. This bill requires a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include clear and conspicuous disclosure that the health care provider depicted in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI or that no human health care provider is depicted. “Clear and conspicuous disclosure” means a disclosure that is difficult to miss, easily understandable, and presented in a manner that a reasonable consumer would notice, read, and comprehend, taking into account the medium, format, and context in which the advertisement appears.

The bill provides that violation constitutes a violation of the FAL, enforceable pursuant to the UCL.^[16] The bill grants a private right of action for a person whose digital replica is used in an advertisement that violates the disclosure requirement, and provides that the person may seek injunctive relief and any appropriate remedy.

Recent amendments to this bill and the related SB 1050 (Ashby), which similarly requires a disclosure when any ad uses a synthetic reporter, largely align the approaches of the two bills. SB 1050 now expressly includes a carve out for violations of this bill, avoiding duplicative liability.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: California Medical Association, the bill’s sponsor, writes:

Advances in artificial intelligence have created new opportunities for innovation, but it is also easier than ever for bad actors to generate convincing “deepfake” images, audio, and video that falsely portray physicians endorsing products or providing medical advice. These AI-generated impersonations are increasingly being used to promote unproven supplements, “miracle cures,” and other health-related products online. Often, scammers clone real physicians’ faces or voices, without their knowledge or consent.

These scams exploit the trust that patients place in physicians and can expose consumers to misleading health information and potentially harmful products. Deepfake “doctors” are garnering millions of views online while promoting non-FDA-approved treatments and dubious medical devices. Patients, particularly older adults and individuals with chronic conditions, are often targeted with deceptive claims, leading them to waste money on ineffective products or delay seeking legitimate medical care.

By requiring clear disclosures when AI is used to generate or significantly alter a person’s likeness or voice in health-related advertising, this bill will help consumers better recognize manipulated content and makeinformed decisions about their health. The bill also provides enforcement authority to the Attorney General to hold bad actors accountable, ensure consistent oversight, and prevent abuse of the law.

Importantly, SB 1146 does not restrict legitimate innovation or the responsible use of artificial intelligence in health care or other sectors. Instead, it draws a clear line against deceptive commercial practices that misappropriate physicians’ identities and put patients at risk.

As AI-generated content becomes increasingly prevalent, Californians deserve clear protection against deceptive health advertising. SB 1146 strikes the right balance by promoting transparency, protecting consumers, and preserving responsible innovation.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Medical Association (CMA) (Sponsor)
American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists - District Ix
California Dental Association
California Dermatology Advocacy Network
California Orthopedic Association
California Podiatric Medical Association
California Radiological Society
Dental Board of California
Kaiser Permanente
Medical Board of California
San Francisco Marin Medical Society
University of California

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Josh Tosney / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200

1. AB 2885 (Bauer-Kahan, Stats. 2024, Ch. 843) defined the term as “an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.” ↑

2. IBM, What is machine learning?, www.ibm.com/topics/machine-learning. ↑

3. Ibid. ↑

4. AB 2013 (Irwin, Ch. 817, Stats. 2024) defined GenAI as “artificial intelligence that can generate derived synthetic content, such as text, images, video, and audio, that emulates the structure and characteristics of the artificial intelligence’s training data.” ↑

5. OpenAI, How ChatGPT and Our Language Models Are Developed, https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7842364-how-chatgpt-and-our-foundation-models-are-developed. ↑

6. Netflix, How Netflix’s Recommendations System Works, https://help.netflix.com/en/node/100639. ↑

7. “James Dean set to star in new film through digital resurrection, horrifying fans” (Nov. 7, 2019) NBC News, https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/james-dean-set-star-new-film-through-digital-resurrection-horrifying-n1078051. ↑

8. Jennifer E. Rothman, The Right of Publicity: Privacy Reimagined for a Public World (Harvard University Press, 2018), p. 117. ↑

9. Lawler, Hollywood’s actors vote to make their new deal official—the strikes are really over (Dec. 5, 2023) The Verge, https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/5/23990186/hollywoods-actors-vote-to-make-their-new-deal-official-the-strikes-are-really-over. ↑

10. Joel Mathis, “Is the first AI ‘actor’ the beginning of Hollywood’s existential crisis?” The Week (Oct. 1, 2025), https://theweek.com/media/first-ai-actor-tilly-norwood-hollwood-backlash. ↑

11. Wesley Yin-Pooole, :SAG-AFTRA Hits Out at Tilly Norwood, the AI-Generated ‘Actress’That Has Enraged Hollywood” IGN (Sep. 30, 2025), https://www.ign.com/articles/sag-aftra-hits-out-at-tilly-norwood-the-ai-generated-actress-that-has-enraged-hollywood. ↑

12. “2026 Memorandum of Agreements Between the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers,” p. 132, https://www.sagaftra.org/sites/default/files/2026-05/2026%20Theatrical-Television%20MOA.pdf. ↑

13. Ibid. ↑

14. Jones, Social Media Is Flooded With AI Doctor ‘Scams’: Creators Can’t Stand It (Mar. 13, 2025) RollingStone, https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-doctor-videos-tiktok-avatars-internet-safety-1235294841/ (link current as of April 10, 2026). ↑

15. Myers, Callahan, & Rosenbluth, The Doctors Are Real, but the Sales Pitches Are Frauds (Sept. 5, 2025) New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/technology/ai-doctor-scams.html. ↑

16. California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which prohibits “unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent” activities, including “anything that [is] a business practice and that at the same time is forbidden by law.” (Nolte v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1401, 1407, internal citations and nested quotation marks omitted.) An action under the UCL may be brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, and, in certain large jurisdictions, city attorneys and county counsels, who may seek injunctive relief and civil penalties of up to $2,500. While private plaintiffs who have suffered injury in fact and lost money because of unfair competition may bring a limited action for restitution and injunctive relief, in practice, this bill would likely be enforced almost exclusively by public prosecutors. ↑

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 1146

Author: Gonzalez (D)

Amended: 4/16/26

Vote: 21

SENATE PRIV., DIGITAL TECH. & CONS. PROT. COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/6/26

AYES: Cabaldon, Gonzalez, McNerney, Padilla, Reyes, Umberg, Wiener

NO VOTE RECORDED: Jones, Ochoa Bogh

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 12-0, 4/14/26

AYES: Umberg, Niello, Allen, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, McNerney, Reyes, Stern, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

NO VOTE RECORDED: Valladares

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-0, 5/14/26

AYES: Cervantes, Cabaldon, Dahle, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab

NO VOTE RECORDED: Seyarto

SUBJECT: Advertisement claims: health-related consumer products and services: digital replicas and synthetic performers

SOURCE: California Medical Association

DIGEST:

This bill requires a person who creates an advertisement to include a disclosure, as applicable, when it includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service, except as provided.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California AI Transparency Act, which becomes operative on January 1, 2026, and requires certain “covered providers” to make an artificial intelligence (AI) detection tool available at no cost by which a person can assess whether content was created or altered by the provider’s GenAI system. (Business (Bus.) & Professions (Prof.) Code § 22757 et seq.)
2. Requires a covered provider to offer users the option to include in AI-generated image, video, or audio content created by its own generative AI system a manifest disclosure that meets specified criteria, including that it identifies the content as AI-generated content. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3(a).)
3. Requires a covered provider to include in AI-generated image, audio, and video content created by its generative AI system a latent disclosure that is detectable by the tool specified above and is, to the extent technically feasible, permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3(b).)
4. Requires a large online platform, starting January 1, 2027, to do the following:
   1. Detect whether any provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body is embedded into or attached to content distributed on the large online platform.
   2. Provide a user interface to disclose the availability of system provenance data that reliably indicates that the content was generated or substantially altered by a GenAI system or captured by a capture device. The user interface shall make clearly and conspicuously available to users information sufficient to identify the content’s authenticity, origin, or history of modification, including specified information such as whether provenance data is available.
   3. Allow a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body in an easily accessible manner by any of several specified means. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3.1.)
5. Provides that violators of the above provisions are liable for a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 per violation to be collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel. Each day in violation is deemed a discrete violation. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.4.)
6. Establishes the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which provides a statutory cause of action for any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, including over the internet. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.)
7. Establishes the False Advertising Law (FAL), which proscribes making or disseminating any statement that is known or should be known to be untrue or misleading with intent to directly or indirectly dispose of real or personal property. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 et seq.)
8. Defines “unfair competition” to mean and include any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and any act prohibited by the False Advertising Law, Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200.)
9. Provides remedies for individuals who have suffered damages as a result of fraud or deceit, including situations involving fraudulent misrepresentations. (Civil (Civ.) Code §§ 1709-1710, 1572-1573.)
10. Establishes California’s right of publicity law, which provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. (Civ. Code § 3344(a).)
11. Provides that any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on a website or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Penal (Pen.) Code § 528.5.)
12. Provides that every person who falsely impersonates another in either their private or official capacity, and in that assumed character carries out specified actions, is punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Pen. Code § 529.)

This bill:

1. Requires a person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes the image, audio, or video of a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence and that no human healthcare provider is depicted. The bill details the specific requirements for such disclosures.
2. Defines “digital replica” to mean a computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual that is embodied in a sound recording, image, audiovisual work, or transmission in which the actual individual either did not actually perform or appear, or the actual individual did perform or appear, but the fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered, subject to certain exemptions.
3. Defines “generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology” to mean when visual or audio media of a natural person is either of the following:
   1. Entirely created using artificial intelligence or other computer technology and would appear to a reasonable person to be authentic.
   2. Materially altered by artificial intelligence or other computer technology, and that alteration would cause a reasonable person to have a fundamentally different understanding of the altered media when comparing it to an unaltered version.
4. Provides that such media does not meet the definition if the media is immaterially altered by AI or other computer technology, including a cosmetic adjustment, color edit, cropped image, or resized image.
5. Defines “synthetic performer” as a humanlike digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part using artificial intelligence, machine learning, or computational techniques, and not based on, derived from, or intended to depict any particular identifiable natural person, as described.
6. Defines “health-related consumer product or service” as a product or service that is marketed for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and is marketed as having a health benefit. Examples include dietary supplements and medical and dental goods and services.
7. Clarifies that advertisements subject hereto must comply with all other applicable laws and that the bill does not abrogate, narrow, or otherwise limit such laws. It explicitly states that it does not authorize use of a person’s likeness for commercial purposes without the individual’s consent.
8. Authorizes civil actions to enforce these provisions to be brought by the Attorney General or by any district attorney. A person whose digital replica is used in an advertisement that violates these provisions may also bring a civil action against the person who created the advertisement.
9. Clarifies that it does not apply to an advertisement if all of the following conditions are met:
   1. The person whose digital replica is used in the advertisement is a health care provider.
   2. The digital replica in the advertisement is depicted as being licensed in the same profession as the person.
   3. The person has provided prior consent to the use of their digital replica in the advertisement.
   4. The person agrees with all of the statements made in the advertisement by the digital replica generated or substantially altered by AI.

Background

Certain forms of media – audio recordings, video recordings, and still images – can be powerful evidence of the truth. While such media have always been susceptible to some degree of manipulation, fakes were relatively easy to detect. The rapid advancement of AI technology, specifically the wide-scale introduction of GenAI models, has made it drastically cheaper and easier to produce synthetic content, including images, videos, and audio, that are not real, but that are so realistic that they are virtually impossible to distinguish from authentic content, including so-called “deepfakes.”

Serious concerns have been raised that the use of GenAI created or altered content featuring the likeness or voice of actual health care providers is being used to sell various health-related products or services without the consent or knowledge of those being depicted. This bill addresses the issue by requiring a person who creates an advertisement to include clear disclosures when the advertisement includes a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as a healthcare provider.

This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association and supported by a variety of medical associations. No opposition has been received. For a more thorough discussion, please see the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection analysis of this bill.

Comment

According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not. Unfortunately, with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake content. This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice. In a single month, one investigation found more than 100 such videos circulating across social media platforms, misleading viewers on important health and safety topics. Consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit. SB 1146 responds to this threat by requiring any health product or service advertisement that uses the image, audio or video of a natural person that is AI generated to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the content was produced using AI. By empowering Californians with the transparency they need to make informed decisions about their health, SB 1146 is a critical step toward protecting vulnerable consumers from deceptive AI-driven advertising and preserving the integrity of trusted medical information.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

Cost pressures to the courts to adjudicate charges pertaining to the creation of prohibited AI-generated advertisements, possibly in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Actual costs will depend on the number of charges filed and the amount of time needed to adjudicate each case. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased pressure on the Trial Court Trust Fund may create a need for increased funding for courts from the General Fund. The Governor’s 2026-27 budget proposes $70 million ongoing from the General Fund to backfill declining revenue to the Trial Court Trust Fund.

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/13/26)

California Medical Association (Source)

American Academy of Pediatrics, California

Board of Registered Nursing
California Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
California Dental Association

California Dermatology Advocacy Network
California Orthopedic Association
California Podiatric Medical Association
California Society of Pathologists
Kaiser Permanente

1 Individual

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/13/26)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: California Medical Association writes:

By requiring clear disclosures when AI is used to generate or significantly alter a person’s likeness or voice in health-related advertising, this bill will help consumers better recognize manipulated content and make informed decisions about their health.

The bill also provides enforcement authority to the Attorney General to hold bad actors accountable, ensure consistent oversight, and prevent abuse of the law. Importantly, SB 1146 does not restrict legitimate innovation or the responsible use of artificial intelligence in health care or other sectors. Instead, it draws a clear line against deceptive commercial practices that misappropriate physicians’ identities and put patients at risk.

Prepared by: Benjamin Diaz / P., D.T., & C.P. / (916) 651-1548, Christian Kurpiewski / P., D.T., & C.P. / (916) 651-1548

5/16/26 10:35:11

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Sabrina Cervantes, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 1146 (Gonzalez) - Advertisement claims: health-related consumer products and services: digital replicas and synthetic performers

Bill Summary:

SB 1146 would require an advertisement that uses an image representing themselves to be a health care providing that was generated by artificial intelligence to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider.

Fiscal Impact:

This bill would authorize the Attorney General or a district attorney to bring a civil action for a violation against any person who created the advertisement. A real person who is identifiably depicted as a medical professional in an advertisement would have the right to seek recourse for the unauthorized use of their image and provide for cumulative remedies.

Cost pressures to the courts to adjudicate charges pertaining to the creation of prohibited AI-generated advertisements, possibly in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Actual costs will depend on the number of charges filed and the amount of time needed to adjudicate each case. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased pressure on the Trial Court Trust Fund may create a need for increased funding for courts from the General Fund. The Governor’s 2026-27 budget proposes $70 million ongoing from the General Fund to backfill declining revenue to the Trial Court Trust Fund.

Background:

AI-enabled systems and chatbots posing as health professionals have sprouted up across the internet, raising serious consumer concerns. While certain AI systems may be trained on legitimate medical sources, unlike licensed healthcare providers who undergo years of rigorous training, AI systems lack the nuanced clinical judgment needed to properly assess symptoms, consider individual patient history, and account for complex interactions between conditions. When these systems present themselves as medical authorities, users may receive inaccurate diagnoses, inappropriate treatment recommendations, or dangerous advice about medication interactions. These systems are especially concerning when used by certain vulnerable groups that may be more likely to trust authoritative-sounding medical advice, especially those with limited healthcare access or health or technology literacy. While there are certainly legitimate AI applications in healthcare, AI systems that misrepresent their capabilities and credentials put users at risk and deceive consumers into thinking a product, service, or information is something it is not.

Proposed Law:

The plaintiff in an authorized enforcement action may seek appropriate remedies, including an injunction to remove the advertisement. This bill clarifies that the remedy provided is cumulative to existing remedies, that is, a person who is depicted in an AI generated ad for health providers would have other causes of action against the defendant, such as a violation of their right to privacy.

Related Legislation:

AB 489 (Bonta) Chapter 615/2025) prohibited AI systems from misrepresenting themselves as licensed or certified health care professionals and permitted the appropriate health care profession board to take action against an AI system that violates this prohibition.

SB 1142 (Becker), 2026 requires a provider of a GenAI tool that is also a large online platform that allows users to create digital replicas to create a mechanism for users to revoke access to their digital replica using the platform’s tool and requires their terms of service to prohibit unlawful digital replicas, as provided. Platforms are required to establish a mechanism to report unlawful digital replicas and a process to respond to such reports. The bill also provides enhanced liability for those using, with actual knowledge, a digital replica that violates specified criminal laws or defamation law. That billl has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Staff Comments:

This bill provides two enforcement mechanisms. The AG or a district attorney may bring a civil action for a violation against any person who created the advertisement.

Additionally, a real person who is identifiably depicted as a medical professional in an advertisement for a health-related consumer product or service can sue any person who created the advertisement, thereby giving a falsely depicted person the right to seek recourse for the unauthorized use of their image. The plaintiff in an authorized enforcement action may seek any appropriate remedies, including an injunction, e.g., to remove the violating advertisement. This bill clarifies that the remedy provided is cumulative to existing remedies, that is, it is likely that a person who is depicted in an AI-generated ad for health products would have other causes of action against the defendant.

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair

2025-2026 Regular Session

Bill No: SB 1146 (Author:Gonzalez)

Version: March 25, 2026

Hearing Date: April 14, 2026

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: AWM

SUBJECT

Health-related consumer products and services: artificial intelligence

DIGEST

This bill requires an advertisement to include a disclosure, as applicable, when it depicts a digitally altered or generated person representing themselves to be, or “identifiably depicting” a person as, a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service, except as provided.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Generative artificial intelligence, or GenAI, has made it dramatically easier and cheaper to create images and videos of realistic-looking humans. While some AI-generated videos still have an uncanny valley feel, many are so realistic as to be indistinguishable from the real thing. Serious concerns have been raised about the proliferation of GenAI images and their ability to mislead, in contexts ranging from the relatively harmless (e.g., AI-generated images purporting to show Tom Holland and Zendaya’s wedding) to the dire (e.g., fake videos of candidates in elections intended to deceive voters).

This bill addresses AI-generated images in the medical context. Specifically, the author and sponsor report that GenAI content portraying medical professionals is being used to sell various health-related products and services, giving the false impression that a medical professional approves of the product. Additionally, in some cases, the AI-generated voice or likeness is that of a real medical professional who did not consent to that usage. To address this problem, this bill requires advertisements to include clear disclosures when a health care provider is “identifiably depicted,” meaning the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person. The bill permits the Attorney General or a district attorney to enforce the bill’s provisions in a civil action, and gives a private right of action to a real person whose likeness or voice was used without their consent. The author has agreed to amendments that clarify the scope of the bill and the exception for real medical professionals who consented in advance to the use of their image.

This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association and is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, California; the California Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry; the California Dental Association; the California Orthopaedic Association; the California Podiatric Medical Association; the California Society of Pathologists; and Kaiser Permanente. The Committee has not received timely opposition to this bill. The Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee passed this bill with a vote of 7-0.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW

Existing constitutional law:

1. Provides that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances. (U.S. Const., 1st amend. (the First Amendment) & 14th amends.; see Gitlow v. People of State of New York (1925) 268 U.S. 652, 666 (First Amendment guarantees apply to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment).)
2. Provides that every person may freely speak, write, and publish their sentiments on all subjects, and that a law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 2 (Section 2).)

Existing state law:

1. Establishes the California AI Transparency Act, which becomes operative on August 2, 2026, and requires certain “covered providers” to make an AI detection tool available at no cost by which a person can assess whether content was created or altered by the provider’s GenAI system. (Bus. & Prof. Code, div. 8, ch. 25, §§ 22757 et seq.)
2. Requires a covered provider to offer users the option to include in AI-generated image, video, or audio content created by its own generative AI system a manifest disclosure that meets specified criteria, including that it identifies the content as AI-generated content. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3(a).)
3. Requires a covered provider to include in AI-generated image, audio, and video content created by its generative AI system a latent disclosure that is detectable by the tool specified above and is, to the extent technically feasible, permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 22757.3(b).)
4. Requires a large online platform, starting January 1, 2027, to do the following:
   1. Detect whether any provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body is embedded into or attached to content distributed on the large online platform.
   2. Provide a user interface to disclose the availability of system provenance data that reliably indicates that the content was generated or substantially altered by a GenAI system or captured by a capture device. The user interface shall make clearly and conspicuously available to users information sufficient to identify the content’s authenticity, origin, or history of modification, including specified information such as whether provenance data is available.
   3. Allow a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body in an easily accessible manner by any of several specified means. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 22757.3.1.)
5. Provides that violators of the above provisions are liable for a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 per violation to be collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel. Each day of a violation is deemed a discrete violation. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 22757.4.)
6. Establishes the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which provides a statutory cause of action for any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, including over the internet. (Bus. & Prof. Code, div. 7, pt. 2, ch. 5, §§ 17200 et seq.)
7. Establishes the False Advertising Law (FAL), which proscribes making or disseminating any statement that is known or should be known to be untrue or misleading with intent to directly or indirectly dispose of real or personal property. (Bus. & Prof. Code, div. 7, pt. 3, §§ 17500 et seq.)
8. Defines “unfair competition” to mean and include any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and any act prohibited by the False Advertising Law, Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200.)
9. Provides remedies for individuals who have suffered damages as a result of fraud or deceit, including situations involving fraudulent misrepresentations. (Civ. Code, §§ 1709-1710, 1572-1573.)
10. Establishes California’s right of publicity law, which provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. (Civ. Code, § 3344(a).)
11. Provides that any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on a website or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Pen. Code, § 528.5.)
12. Provides that every person who falsely impersonates another in either their private or official capacity, and in that assumed character carries out specified actions, is punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Pen. Code, § 529.)

This bill:

1. Defines the following relevant terms:
   1. “Artificial intelligence” means an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.
   2. “Generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology” means when a visual or audio media of a natural person is either (1) entirely created using artificial intelligence or other computer technology and would appear to a reasonable person to be authentic, or (2) materially altered by artificial intelligence or other computer technology such that the alteration would cause a reasonable person to have a fundamentally different understanding of the altered media when comparing it to an unaltered version; but a visual or audio media of a natural person is not “generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology” if the media is immaterially altered by artificial intelligence or other computer technology, including a cosmetic adjustment, color edit, cropped image, or resized image.
   3. “Health-related consumer product or service” means a product or service that is marketed for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and is marketed as having a health benefit, including dietary supplements and medical and dental goods and services.
   4. “Health care provider” means a person licensed under Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code.
   5. “Identifiably depicted” means that the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person.
   6. “Natural person” means a natural human individual, and does not include a firm, partnership, association, corporation, limited liability company, or cooperative association.
2. An advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person representing themselves to be, or identifiably depicting a person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service shall include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider, and shall comply with all of the following:
   1. For visual media, the text of the disclosure shall appear in a prominent location and in a size that is easily readable by the average viewer. For visual media that is video, that disclosure shall be displayed for the duration of the video.
   2. For audio-only media, the disclosure shall be read in a clearly spoken manner and in a pitch that can be easily heard by the average listener, at the beginning of the audio, at the end of the audio, and, if the audio is greater than two minutes in length, interspersed within the audio at intervals of not greater than two minutes each.
3. Provides that advertisements subject to 2) shall comply with all other applicable state and federal laws, and that this bill does not abrogate, narrow, or otherwise limit any other applicable state or federal law, including, but not limited to, the FAL, or authorize the use of a person’s likeness for commercial purposes without the individual’s consent.
4. Provides the following remedies:
   1. The Attorney General or a district attorney may bring a civil action to enforce 2) and may seek any appropriate remedy, including, but not limited to, injunctive relief.
   2. A natural person identifiably depicted as a health care provider in an advertisement that violates 2) may bring a civil action against the person who created the advertisement and may seek any appropriate remedy, including, but not limited to, injunctive relief.
5. Provides that the remedies in 4) are cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided for by law, including the right of publicity law.
6. Clarifies that a violation of 2) shall not constitute a misdemeanor.
7. Provides that 2) does not consent to an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a person representing themselves to be, or depicting the person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service if all of the following conditions are met:
   1. The health care provider depicted in the advertisement is an identifiably depicted natural person who is licensed in the same professional practice as depicted in the advertisement.
   2. The identifiably depicted natural person has provided prior consent to the use of their image in the advertisement.
   3. The identifiably depicted natural person agrees with all of the statements made by the image, audio, or video of themselves generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence.
8. Provides that, for purposes of 1)-7), factors that may be considered in determining whether a natural person is “identifiably depicted” in an electronic representation include whether the electronic representation identifies itself by the natural person’s name, whether the electronic representation uses any visual or auditory cues commonly associated with the natural person, and whether the advertisement featuring the electronic representation addresses a subject matter or health issue in which the natural person specializes.

COMMENTS

1. Author’s comment

According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not. Unfortunately, with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake content. This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice. In a single month, one investigation found more than 100 such videos circulating across social media platforms, misleading viewers on important health and safety topics. Consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit. SB 1146 responds to this threat by requiring any health product or service advertisement that uses the image, audio or video of a natural person that is AI generated to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the content was produced using AI. By empowering Californians with the transparency they need to make informed decisions about their health, SB 1146 is a critical step toward protecting vulnerable consumers from deceptive AI-driven advertising and preserving the integrity of trusted medical information.

2. The Chatbot Will See You Now

As generative AI becomes more sophisticated, health-related AI applications have become more common. The Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee’s analysis of this bill explains the issue:

AI-enabled systems and chatbots posing as health professionals have sprouted up across the internet, raising serious consumer and public health concerns. While certain AI systems may be trained on legitimate medical sources, unlike licensed healthcare providers who undergo years of rigorous training, AI systems lack the nuanced clinical judgment needed to properly assess symptoms, consider individual patient history, and account for complex interactions between conditions. When these systems present themselves as medical authorities, users may receive inaccurate diagnoses, inappropriate treatment recommendations, or dangerous advice about medication interactions. These systems are especially concerning when used by certain vulnerable groups that may be more likely to trust authoritative-sounding medical advice, especially those with limited healthcare access or health or technology literacy. While there are certainly legitimate AI applications in healthcare, AI systems that misrepresent their capabilities and credentials put users at risk and deceive consumers into thinking a product, service, or information is something it is not.

A recent article highlighted the flooding of social media with such AI-enabled tools hawking medical information:

AI is easier than ever to produce and as a result, ads with AI talking heads that claim to be medical experts are infiltrating social media’s robust wellness ecosystem. This isn’t isolated to one app. On Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok, a particular kind of AI health video — one that uses an AI avatar to convince people of medical expertise — has become the defacto way for accounts to convince people that they, and their unproven products, are legit. Unlike AI images from just a few years ago, many of these videos feature a combination of real footage and AI, which results in avatars who look extremely lifelike at first glance — and are edited exactly the same as direct to camera content that’s popular on video apps.^[1]

One recent article emphasizes the issue:

Dr. Robert H. Lustig is an endocrinologist, a professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, and an author of best-selling books on obesity.

He is absolutely not — despite what you might see and hear on Facebook — hawking “liquid pearls” with dubious claims about weight loss. “No injections, no surgery, just results,” he appears to say in one post.

Instead, someone has used artificial intelligence to make a video that imitates him and his voice — all without his knowledge, let alone consent.

The posts are part of a global surge of frauds hijacking the online personas of prominent medical professionals to sell unproven health products or simply to swindle gullible customers, according to the doctors, government officials and researchers who have tracked the problem.

While health care has long attracted quackery, A.I. tools developed by Big Tech are enabling the people behind these impersonations to reach millions online — and to profit from them. The result is seeding disinformation, undermining trust in the profession and potentially endangering patients.^[2]

3. This bill requires health-related advertisements with AI-generated images or audio of a healthcare professional to contain a disclosure to that effect

This bill seeks to address these deceptive advertisements by requiring them to include specified disclosures. Specifically, an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person representing themselves to be, or “identifiably depicting” a person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using AI or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service shall include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider. “Identifiably depicted” means that the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person. The bill does not require a disclosure when the advertisement depicts (1) a real person licensed in the practice depicted, (2) who has given prior consent to their portrayal in the advertisement, and (3) agrees with the statements made by their AI avatar.

The author has agreed to amendments to clarify that the bill applies to both AI-generated digital replicas of real people and to fully synthetic AI creations intended to be mistaken for medical professionals. The amendments incorporate concepts from existing law as well as another bill pending before this Committee, SB 1050 (Ashby, 2026), to ensure consistency between legal frameworks.

The Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee considered this bill from an overall standpoint and passed it with a vote of 7-0. This Committee has jurisdiction over (1) the remedies created by the bill and (2) the First Amendment question that arises whenever the state compels commercial speech.

a. Remedies

The bill provides two enforcement mechanisms. The Attorney General or a district attorney may bring a civil action for a violation against any person who created the advertisement. Additionally, a real person who is identifiably depicted as a medical professional in an advertisement for a health-related consumer product or service can sue any person who created the advertisement, thereby giving a falsely depicted person the right to seek recourse for the unauthorized use of their image. The plaintiff in an authorized enforcement action may seek any appropriate remedies, including an injunction, e.g., to remove the violating advertisement. The bill clarifies that the remedy provided is cumulative to existing remedies; it is likely that a person who is depicted in an AI-generated ad for health products would have other causes of action against the defendant, such as a violation of their right to publicity under Civil Code section 3344.

b. First Amendment analysis

“Commercial speech,” including statements made in advertising, is protected by the First Amendment but enjoys a lesser degree of protection than other forms of constitutionally guaranteed expression.^[3] “The First Amendment’s concern for commercial speech is based on the informational function of advertising.”^[4] Advertising that is misleading or unlawful has no informational value and can be banned by the government.^[5] But for an advertisement that “is neither misleading nor unrelated to unlawful activity, the government’s power is more circumscribed.”^[6] To regulate accurate speech relating to legal activity, the government must assert a “substantial interest” to be achieved, and the limitation “must be designed carefully to achieve the State’s goal.”^[7] When a state seeks to compel commercial speech, e.g., require an advertisement to disclose specific information, “a requirement that [an advertiser] include in [their] advertising purely factual and uncontroversial information” that will “dissipate the possibility of consumer confusion or deception” will generally pass First Amendment muster.^[8]

The disclosure here appears reasonably tailored to achieve the important goal of avoiding consumer confusion about the nature of an advertisement, specifically, whether an actual doctor is recommending a health product. The amendments agreed upon by the author, set forth below in Comment 4, also clarify that the obligation to add a disclosure is on the person who created the advertisement, or caused it to be created, thereby ensuring that persons who subsequently broadcast or disseminate the advertisement are not held liable for the creator’s misfeasance.

4. Amendments

As noted above, the author has agreed to amendments that clarify the bill’s scope, including by adding terms and making the person who creates the advertisement, or causes it to be created, responsible for adding the disclosure. The amendments are set forth below, subject to any nonsubstantive changes the Office of Legislative Counsel may make.

Amendment 1

At page 3, between lines 2 and 3, insert:

(3) “Creates” includes causing a video or audio media to be created through prompts to a generative artificial intelligence system.

(4) “Digital replica” has the same meaning as in Section 3344.1 of the Civil Code.

Amendment 2

At page 3, between lines 17 and 18, insert:

(9) “Synthetic performer” means a human-like digital figure, voice, or representation created in whole or in part using artificial intelligence, machine learning, or computational techniques, and not based on, derived from, or intended to depict any particular identifiable natural person as described in Section 3344 of the Civil Code.

Amendment 3

At page 3, delete lines 18-19 and line 20 through “as,” and insert:

(b) A person who creates or causes to be created an advertisement that includes the image, audio, or video of a digital replica or synthetic performer depicted as

Amendment 4

At page 3, in lines 26-27, delete “that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider” and insert “that no human health care provider is depicted”

Amendment 5

At page 4, in lines 15-16, delete “identifiably depicted as a health care provider” and insert “whose digital replica is used”

Amendment 6

At page 4, delete line 32 and line 33 through “as,” and insert “a digital replica depicted as”

Amendment 7

At page 4, delete lines 38-40, and at page 5, delete lines 1-5, and insert:

(1) The natural person whose digital replica is used in the advertisement is a health care provider.

(2) The digital replica in the advertisement is depicted as being licensed in the same profession as the natural person.

(3) The natural person has provided prior consent to the use of their digital replica in the advertisement.

(4) The natural person agrees with all of the statements made in the advertisement by the digital replica generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence.

Amendment 8

At page 5, delete line 7 after “a” and delete line 8 through “representation” and insert “depiction of a health care provider is a “digital replica”

5. Arguments in support

According to the California Medical Association:

Advances in artificial intelligence have created new opportunities for innovation, but it is also easier than ever for bad actors to generate convincing “deepfake” images, audio, and video that falsely portray physicians endorsing products or providing medical advice. These AI-generated impersonations are increasingly being used to promote unproven supplements, “miracle cures,” and other health-related products online. Often, scammers clone real physicians’ faces or voices, without their knowledge or consent.

These scams exploit the trust that patients place in physicians and can expose consumers to misleading health information and potentially harmful products. Deepfake “doctors” are garnering millions of views online while promoting non-FDA-approved treatments and dubious medical devices. Patients, particularly older adults and individuals with chronic conditions, are often targeted with deceptive claims, leading them to waste money on ineffective products or delay seeking legitimate medical care.

By requiring clear disclosures when AI is used to generate or significantly alter a person’s likeness or voice in health-related advertising, this bill will help consumers better recognize manipulated content and make informed decisions about their health. The bill also provides enforcement authority to the Attorney General to hold bad actors accountable, ensure consistent oversight, and prevent abuse of the law.

SUPPORT

California Medical Association (sponsor)

American Academy of Pediatrics, California

California Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
California Dental Association

California Orthopaedic Association

California Podiatric Medical Association

California Society of Pathologists

Kaiser Permanente

OPPOSITION

None received

RELATED LEGISLATION

Pending legislation:

SB 1142 (Becker, 2026) requires a provider of a GenAI tool that is also a large online platform that allows users to create digital replicas to create a mechanism for users to revoke access to their digital replica using the platform’s tool and requires their terms of service to prohibit unlawful digital replicas, as provided. Platforms are required to establish a mechanism to report unlawful digital replicas and a process to respond to such reports. The bill also provides enhanced liability for those using, with actual knowledge, a digital replica that violates specified criminal laws or defamation law. SB 1142 is pending before this Committee.

SB 1050 (Ashby, 2026) requires an advertisement depicting a synthetic performer, as defined, to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the performer is synthetic. SB 1050 is pending before this Committee.

SB 903 (Padilla, 2026) regulates when a licensed professional may engage in the use of AI to assist in providing supplementary support in therapy or psychotherapy, as specified, and provides that an individual or entity may not provide or offer therapy in the state unless the services are conducted by a licensed professional. SB 903 is pending before the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee.

Prior legislation: AB 489 (Bonta, Ch. 615, Stats. 2025) prohibited AI systems from misrepresenting themselves as licensed or certified health care professionals, and permitted the appropriate health care profession board to take action against an AI system that violates this prohibition.

PRIOR VOTES:

Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee (Ayes 7, Noes 0)

**************

1. Jones, Social Media Is Flooded With AI Doctor ‘Scams’: Creators Can’t Stand It (Mar. 13, 2025) RollingStone, https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-doctor-videos-tiktok-avatars-internet-safety-1235294841/ (link current as of April 10, 2026). ↑

2. Myers, Callahan, & Rosenbluth, The Doctors Are Real, but the Sales Pitches Are Frauds (Sept. 5, 2025) New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/technology/ai-doctor-scams.html. ↑

3. Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York (1980) 447 U.S. 557, 562-563. ↑

4. Id. at p. 563. ↑

5. Ibid. ↑

6. Ibid. ↑

7. Ibid. ↑

8. Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio (1985) 471 U.S. 626, 651. ↑

SENATE PRIVACY, DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION COMMITTEE

Senator Christopher Cabaldon, Chair

2025-2026 Regular Session

Bill No: SB 1146 (Author:Gonzalez)

Version: March 25, 2026

Hearing Date: April 6, 2026

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: CK

SUBJECT

Advertisement claims: health-related consumer products and services: artificial intelligence.

DIGEST

This bill requires an advertisement to include a disclosure, as applicable, when it depicts a digitally altered or generated person representing themselves to be, or “identifiably depicting” a person as, a health care provider to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service, except as provided.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Certain forms of media – audio recordings, video recordings, and still images – can be powerful evidence of the truth. While such media have always been susceptible to some degree of manipulation, fakes were relatively easy to detect. The rapid advancement of AI technology, specifically the wide-scale introduction of GenAI models, has made it drastically cheaper and easier to produce synthetic content, including images, videos, and audio, that are not real, but that are so realistic that they are virtually impossible to distinguish from authentic content, including so-called “deepfakes.”

Serious concerns have been raised that the use of GenAI created or altered content featuring the likeness or voice of actual health care providers are being used to sell various health-related products or services without the consent or knowledge of those being depicted. This bill addresses the issue by requiring advertisements to include clear disclosures when a health care provider is “identifiably depicted,” meaning the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person.

This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association and supported by a variety of medical associations. No timely opposition was received. Should the bill pass out of this Committee, it will next be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California AI Transparency Act, which becomes operative on January 1, 2026, and requires certain “covered providers” to make an AI detection tool available at no cost by which a person can assess whether content was created or altered by the provider’s GenAI system. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757 et seq.)
2. Requires a covered provider to offer users the option to include in AI-generated image, video, or audio content created by its own generative AI system a manifest disclosure that meets specified criteria, including that it identifies the content as AI-generated content. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3(a).)
3. Requires a covered provider to include in AI-generated image, audio, and video content created by its generative AI system a latent disclosure that is detectable by the tool specified above and is, to the extent technically feasible, permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3(b).)
4. Requires a large online platform, starting January 1, 2027, to do the following:
   1. Detect whether any provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body is embedded into or attached to content distributed on the large online platform.
   2. Provide a user interface to disclose the availability of system provenance data that reliably indicates that the content was generated or substantially altered by a GenAI system or captured by a capture device. The user interface shall make clearly and conspicuously available to users information sufficient to identify the content’s authenticity, origin, or history of modification, including specified information such as whether provenance data is available.
   3. Allow a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body in an easily accessible manner by any of several specified means. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.3.1.)
5. Provides that violators of the above provisions are liable for a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 per violation to be collected in a civil action filed by the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel. Each day in violation is deemed a discrete violation. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.4.)
6. Establishes the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which provides a statutory cause of action for any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, including over the internet. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.)
7. Establishes the False Advertising Law (FAL), which proscribes making or disseminating any statement that is known or should be known to be untrue or misleading with intent to directly or indirectly dispose of real or personal property. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 et seq.)
8. Defines “unfair competition” to mean and include any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and any act prohibited by the False Advertising Law, Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200.)
9. Provides remedies for individuals who have suffered damages as a result of fraud or deceit, including situations involving fraudulent misrepresentations. (See Civ. Code §§ 1709-1710, 1572-1573.)
10. Establishes California’s right of publicity law, which provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. (Civ. Code § 3344(a).)
11. Provides that any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on a website or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Pen. Code § 528.5.)
12. Provides that every person who falsely impersonates another in either their private or official capacity, and in that assumed character carries out specified actions, is punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment. (Pen. Code § 529.)

This bill:

1. Requires an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person representing themselves to be, or identifiably depicting a person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the relevant material in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider. The bill details the specific requirements for such disclosures.
2. Defines “generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence or other computer technology” to mean when visual or audio media of a natural person is either of the following:
   1. Entirely created using artificial intelligence or other computer technology and would appear to a reasonable person to be authentic.
   2. Materially altered by artificial intelligence or other computer technology, and that alteration would cause a reasonable person to have a fundamentally different understanding of the altered media when comparing it to an unaltered version.
3. Provides that such media does not meet the definition if the media is immaterially altered by AI or other computer technology, including a cosmetic adjustment, color edit, cropped image, or resized image.
4. Define “identifiably depicted” as the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation that is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person.
5. Defines “health-related consumer product or service” as a product or service that is marketed for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and is marketed as having a health benefit. Examples include dietary supplements and medical and dental goods and services.
6. Clarifies that advertisements subject hereto must comply with all other applicable laws and that the bill does not abrogate, narrow, or otherwise limit such laws. It explicitly states that it does not authorize use of a person’s likeness for commercial purposes without the individual’s consent.
7. Authorizes civil actions to enforce these provisions to be brought by the Attorney General or by any district attorney. A person identifiably depicted as a health care provider in an advertisement that violates these provisions may also bring a civil action against the person who created the advertisement.
8. Clarifies that it does not apply to an advertisement if all of the following conditions are met:
   1. The health care provider depicted in the advertisement is an identifiably depicted natural person who is licensed in the same professional practice as depicted in the advertisement.
   2. The identifiably depicted natural person has provided prior consent to the use of their image in the advertisement.
   3. The identifiably depicted natural person agrees with all of the statements made by the image, audio, or video of themselves generated or substantially altered by AI.
9. Lays out factors that may be considered in determining whether a natural person is “identifiably depicted,” including whether the electronic representation identifies itself by the natural person’s name, whether the electronic representation uses any visual or auditory cues commonly associated with the natural person, and whether the advertisement featuring the electronic representation addresses a subject matter or health issue in which the natural person specializes.

COMMENTS

1. Not a doctor

AI-enabled systems and chatbots posing as health professionals have sprouted up across the internet, raising serious consumer and public health concerns. While certain AI systems may be trained on legitimate medical sources, unlike licensed healthcare providers who undergo years of rigorous training, AI systems lack the nuanced clinical judgment needed to properly assess symptoms, consider individual patient history, and account for complex interactions between conditions. When these systems present themselves as medical authorities, users may receive inaccurate diagnoses, inappropriate treatment recommendations, or dangerous advice about medication interactions. These systems are especially concerning when used by certain vulnerable groups that may be more likely to trust authoritative-sounding medical advice, especially those with limited healthcare access or health or technology literacy. While there are certainly legitimate AI applications in healthcare, AI systems that misrepresent their capabilities and credentials put users at risk and deceive consumers into thinking a product, service, or information is something it is not.

A recent article highlighted the flooding of social media with such AI-enabled tools hawking medical information:

AI is easier than ever to produce and as a result, ads with AI talking heads that claim to be medical experts are infiltrating social media’s robust wellness ecosystem. This isn’t isolated to one app. On Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok, a particular kind of AI health video — one that uses an AI avatar to convince people of medical expertise — has become the defacto way for accounts to convince people that they, and their unproven products, are legit. Unlike AI images from just a few years ago, many of these videos feature a combination of real footage and AI, which results in avatars who look extremely lifelike at first glance — and are edited exactly the same as direct to camera content that’s popular on video apps.^[1]

One recent article emphasizes the issue:

Dr. Robert H. Lustig is an endocrinologist, a professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, and an author of best-selling books on obesity.

He is absolutely not — despite what you might see and hear on Facebook — hawking “liquid pearls” with dubious claims about weight loss. “No injections, no surgery, just results,” he appears to say in one post.

Instead, someone has used artificial intelligence to make a video that imitates him and his voice — all without his knowledge, let alone consent.

The posts are part of a global surge of frauds hijacking the online personas of prominent medical professionals to sell unproven health products or simply to swindle gullible customers, according to the doctors, government officials and researchers who have tracked the problem.

While health care has long attracted quackery, A.I. tools developed by Big Tech are enabling the people behind these impersonations to reach millions online — and to profit from them. The result is seeding disinformation, undermining trust in the profession and potentially endangering patients.^[2]

1. Ensuring transparency in AI-generated health advertisements

This bill seeks to address these deceptive advertisements by requiring them to include specified disclosures. Specifically, an advertisement that uses the image, audio, or video of a natural person representing themselves to be, or identifiably depicting a person as, a health care provider that is generated or substantially altered using AI or other computer technology to promote the sale of a health-related consumer product or service shall include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the image, audio, or video, as applicable, of the person in the advertisement was generated or substantially altered by AI and that the person identifiably depicted is not a health care provider. “Identifiably depicted” means that the visual likeness or voice of a natural person within an electronic representation is readily identifiable, even if the electronic representation is not identical to the natural person. The bill provides factors that may be considered in determining whether a natural person is “identifiably depicted” including whether the representation identifies itself by the person’s name, uses any visual or auditory cues commonly associated with the natural person, and the advertisement addresses a subject matter or health issue in which the natural person specializes.

The bill details the specifics of the required disclosure. For visual media, the text of the disclosure must appear in a prominent location and in a size that is easily readable by the average viewer. For visual media that is video, that disclosure shall be displayed for the duration of the video. If it is audio-only media, the disclosure shall be read in a clearly spoken manner and in a pitch that can be easily heard by the average listener, at the beginning of the audio, at the end of the audio, and, if the audio is greater than two minutes in length, interspersed within the audio at intervals of not greater than two minutes each.

The bill authorizes action to be brought against those in violation by the Attorney General, any district attorney, and the person identifiably depicted.

According to the author:

Californians deserve to know when the physician they encounter online is real and when it is not. Unfortunately, with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake content. This has led to a dangerous new trend of scammers using AI images of physicians to sell unproven supplements and dispense baseless medical advice. In a single month, one investigation found more than 100 such videos circulating across social media platforms, misleading viewers on important health and safety topics. Consumers misled by AI-generated health advertising may forgo proven treatments, ingest unsafe supplements, or spend money on products with no demonstrated medical benefit. SB 1146 responds to this threat by requiring any health product or service advertisement that uses the image, audio or video of a natural person that is AI generated to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the content was produced using AI. By empowering Californians with the transparency they need to make informed decisions about their health, SB 1146 is a critical step toward protecting vulnerable consumers from deceptive AI-driven advertising and preserving the integrity of trusted medical information.

Writing in support, the California Medical Association, the sponsor of the bill, asserts:

Advances in artificial intelligence have created new opportunities for innovation, but it is also easier than ever for bad actors to generate convincing “deepfake” images, audio, and video that falsely portray physicians endorsing products or providing medical advice. These AI-generated impersonations are increasingly being used to promote unproven supplements, “miracle cures,” and other health-related products online. Often, scammers clone real physicians’ faces or voices, without their knowledge or consent.

These scams exploit the trust that patients place in physicians and can expose consumers to misleading health information and potentially harmful products. Deepfake “doctors” are garnering millions of views online while promoting non-FDA-approved treatments and dubious medical devices. Patients, particularly older adults and individuals with chronic conditions, are often targeted with deceptive claims, leading them to waste money on ineffective products or delay seeking legitimate medical care.

By requiring clear disclosures when AI is used to generate or significantly alter a person’s likeness or voice in health-related advertising, this bill will help consumers better recognize manipulated content and make informed decisions about their health. The bill also provides enforcement authority to the Attorney General to hold bad actors accountable, ensure consistent oversight, and prevent abuse of the law.

Importantly, SB 1146 does not restrict legitimate innovation or the responsible use of artificial intelligence in health care or other sectors. Instead, it draws a clear line against deceptive commercial practices that misappropriate physicians’ identities and put patients at risk.

1. Interaction with existing law

One issue that has been raised is whether existing law already specifically addresses the issue. For instance, California has a right of publicity law, which provides that any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof.

In addition, the FAL proscribes making or disseminating any statement that is known or should be known to be untrue or misleading with intent to directly or indirectly dispose of real or personal property. Violators are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500 for each violation in an action brought by specified public prosecutors. The FAL provides that a person may bring an action for an injunction or restitution if the person has suffered injury in fact and has lost money or property as a result of a violation of the FAL. There are also laws providing remedies for those damaged by fraudulent misrepresentations and criminal laws that prohibit and provide penalties for false impersonation.

In response, the author asserts:

While California already has robust protections they were not designed with the use of AI-generated imagery or deepfake videos impersonating licensed medical professionals. As a result, medical professionals’ images are being used with little recourse or practical enforcement to stop these deep-fakes. Therefore, SB 1146 builds on existing laws to provide greater protections for physicians and consumers alike. First, it ensures consumers have the information they need to make informed decisions about health-related products by requiring clear and conspicuous disclosures when AI-generated or manipulated media is used to depict a purported health care provider. Second, it creates meaningful accountability by empowering the Attorney General, any district attorney, and the physician whose likeness was used without consent to bring civil action against these bad actors. This legislation is a targeted, necessary update to California law that closes a significant gap exploited daily by those willing to deceive vulnerable consumers for profit.

SUPPORT

California Medical Association (sponsor)
American Academy of Pediatrics, California

California Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

California Dental Association

California Orthopedic Association

California Podiatric Medical Association

California Society of Pathologists

Kaiser Permanente

OPPOSITION

None known

RELATED LEGISLATION

SB 1050 (Ashby, 2026) makes it an unlawful practice for a person, in connection with the creation or dissemination of an advertisement in this state, to use or cause to be used a synthetic performer, as defined, without a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the performer is synthetic. SB 1050 is set to be heard by this Committee the same day as this bill.

SB 1142 (Becker, 2026) requires a provider of a GenAI tool that is also a large online platform that allows users to create digital replicas to create a mechanism for users to revoke access to their digital replica using the platform’s tool and requires their terms of service to prohibit unlawful digital replicas, as provided. Platforms are required to establish a mechanism to report unlawful digital replicas and a process to respond to such reports. The bill also provides enhanced liability for those using, with actual knowledge, a digital replica that violates specified criminal laws or defamation law. SB 1142 is set to be heard by this Committee the same day as this bill.

AB 489 (Bonta, Ch. 615, Stats. 2025) clarifies that provisions of law that prohibit the use of specified terms, letters, or phrases to falsely indicate or imply possession of a license or certificate to practice a health care profession, as defined, apply to an entity who develops or deploys AI or GenAI technology that uses such terms, letters, or phrases in its advertising or functionality, prohibits such usage, and subjects such developers and deployers to the same oversight and enforcement.

**************

1. CT Jones, Social Media Is Flooded With AI Doctor ‘Scams’: Creators Can’t Stand It (March 13, 2025) RollingStone, https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-doctor-videos-tiktok-avatars-internet-safety-1235294841/. All internet citations are current as of March 30, 2026. ↑

2. Steven Lee Myers, Alice Callahan, & Teddy Rosenbluth, The Doctors Are Real, but the Sales Pitches Are Frauds (September 5, 2025) The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/technology/ai-doctor-scams.html. ↑