California Follows New York’s Lead in Requiring AI “Synthetic Performer” Disclosures in Advertising

On September 16, 2026, California became the second state in the country to require disclosures of AI-generated synthetic performers in advertising. Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 1050 — a measure that prohibits advertisers from publishing advertisements prominently featuring AI-generated synthetic performers without a clear and conspicuous disclosure — effective January 1, 2027.

What SB 1050 Requires

SB 1050 makes it unlawful for any person to create and publish an advertisement that prominently includes a synthetic performer without a clear and conspicuous disclosure. The required disclosure must use wording substantially similar to "this performance features a synthetic performer" or "no human performer is depicted."

A synthetic performer is a digital figure, voice, or representation — created in whole or in part using generative AI — that creates the realistic impression of a human performer who is not recognizable as any identifiable real person. The definition covers AI-generated voices, not just visual depictions, and applies to entirely fabricated human likenesses, not to AI used to enhance the appearance of a real person.

A synthetic performer is used “prominently” — and the disclosure obligation is triggered — when it: (a) appears in the foreground and demonstrates or illustrates the product or service; (b) provides or voices the on- or off-camera narration or commercial message; or (c) illustrates or reacts to the on- or off-camera narration or commercial message.

A clear and conspicuous disclosure is one that is difficult to miss, easily understandable, and presented in a manner that a reasonable consumer would notice, read, and comprehend, considering the medium, format, and context of the advertisement.

The law also places obligations on advertising media, including broadcast stations, cable operators, online platforms, streaming services, and digital advertising networks. Once a court issues an order finding a violation, and the advertising medium is served with that order along with information sufficient to identify the advertisement, the advertising medium must remove the advertisement and cease further dissemination as soon as commercially reasonable and technically feasible and must stop accepting payment for further distribution

Two narrow exceptions apply. First, advertisements for expressive works — such as motion pictures, television programs, streaming content, documentaries, or video games — are exempt, provided the synthetic performer’s use in the advertisement is consistent with its use in the underlying work. Second, the law does not apply where generative AI is used solely for language translation of a human performer or for accessibility features.

Enforcement

A violation of SB 1050 constitutes a violation of California’s False Advertising Law (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500) and may be enforced through the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200). The law does not set its own penalty amount; it imports the remedies available under those existing statutes, which include civil penalties, injunctive relief, and disgorgement. Because the law does not bar private rights of action, private litigation is a real risk.

How California Compares to New York

As detailed in a prior client alert, New York enacted its own synthetic performer disclosure law, which went into effect in June 2026. The two laws share the same underlying goal but differ in ways that matter for multistate campaigns.

New York’s law applies whenever a synthetic performer appears in an advertisement, while California’s law applies only when the synthetic performer is used “prominently.” Unlike California, New York does not expressly cover AI-generated voices, prescribe safe-harbor disclosure language, or impose take-down obligations on advertising media after a court order. And while New York limits enforcement to civil penalties — $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for each subsequent violation — and does not create a private right of action, California’s enforcement mechanism opens the door to private rights of action with no fixed penalty ceiling

Practical Implications

As SB 1050 takes effect, advertisers should take prompt steps to:

• Audit in-production and future campaigns: Advertisers should identify all visual, audio, and audiovisual advertising that reaches California consumers and assess whether any synthetic performer is used prominently.
• Implement appropriate disclosures using California's safe-harbor language: For campaigns that trigger the law, implement clear and conspicuous disclosures using one of the statutory model phrases. Consult with legal counsel to identify whether a given campaign triggers the law and, if so, to determine the appropriate placement of the required disclosures.
• Update vendor, agency, and platform agreements: Production contracts, agency service agreements, and platform terms should clearly address responsibility for disclosure compliance when AI-generated content is involved.
• Embed AI disclosure into your creative review process: Build a disclosure checkpoint directly into the creative approval process for all visual, audio, and audiovisual advertising, ensuring that every asset is assessed before it goes live.
• Build review procedures for court orders: Platforms, ad networks, streaming services, and publishers should establish internal procedures to receive and act on court orders requiring removal of noncompliant advertisements, and to cease accepting payment for further dissemination.

As AI-generated advertising becomes a mainstream creative tool, the legal obligations surrounding it are evolving just as quickly. Companies that stay ahead of the disclosure curve will be better protected against enforcement risk and litigation as additional states move to act. Crowell’s Advertising and Brand Protection team is available to assist companies in assessing and implementing their compliance obligations under SB 1050 and parallel state laws.