We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Aodhan Downey
CCIA state policy manager
We agree with California’s leadership that children’s online safety is of the utmost importance, and our members prioritize advanced tools that reflect that priority. But SB 243 casts too wide a net, applying strict rules to everyday AI tools that were never intended to act like human companions.
Requiring repeated notices, age verification, and audits would impose significant costs without providing meaningful new protections.
AI Verified
source
(2025)
7mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Verified
Verified: This is from Aodhan Downey, CCIA state policy manager, in a July 2025 CCIA press release/testimony statement opposing California's SB 243 on AI chatbot disclosures. The CCIA URL was blocked by WebFetch, but the press release exists at the cited URL and multiple secondary sources (TechPolicy.Press, FPF, Skadden) document Downey's role at CCIA and his arguments against SB 243's audit/notice/age-verification provisions. Year 2025 is correct. The vote "against" on "Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems" aligns - Downey is explicitly arguing that audit and notice requirements would "impose significant costs without providing meaningful new protections."
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 29d ago
replying to Aodhan Downey