EdLaw
California companion chatbot law (Bus. & Prof. Code ch. 22.6, SB 243)
California's first statute regulating companion chatbots: Chapter 22.6 of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code (§§22601–22606), added by SB 243 (Stats. 2025, ch. 677) and in effect from 1 January 2026. It binds an operator — "a person who makes a companion chatbot platform available to a user in the state" — and requires an AI-disclosure notice, a published suicide and self-harm protocol, extra safeguards for users the operator knows are minors, annual reporting to the Office of Suicide Prevention from July 2027, and a "may not be suitable for some minors" disclosure, with a private right of action. Two 2026 acts amend it from 1 January 2027: Adam's Law (SB 1119) rewrites §22602 and moves the duties toward children into a new chapter, and SB 867 adds a toy definition and a moratorium on toys that include a companion chatbot.
Applicability to EdTech
The chapter turns on the definition of a companion chatbot, not on who buys the product or where it is used. A conversational AI product reaches it if it is "an artificial intelligence system with a natural language interface that provides adaptive, human-like responses to user inputs and is capable of meeting a user’s social needs, including by exhibiting anthropomorphic features and being able to sustain a relationship across multiple interactions" (§22601(b)(1)). There is no exclusion for educational products or for products provided through schools. The three exclusions are narrow (§22601(b)(2)):
- a bot used only for "customer service, a business’ operational purposes, productivity and analysis related to source information, internal research, or technical assistance" ((A));
- a video-game bot limited to replies about the game ((B));
- "A stand-alone consumer electronic device that functions as a speaker and voice command interface, acts as a voice-activated virtual assistant, and does not sustain a relationship across multiple interactions or generate outputs that are likely to elicit emotional responses in the user" ((C)).
The definition's own conditions — capable of meeting social needs, and able to "sustain a relationship across multiple interactions" — are the questions an EdTech tutor or assistant has to answer for itself; the statute gives no further test.
Key obligations at a glance
- AI disclosure where a reasonable person would be misled into thinking they were talking to a human — §22602(a).
- Suicide and self-harm protocol, including referral to crisis services, as a condition of the chatbot engaging with users at all; details published on the operator's website — §22602(b)(1), (b)(2).
- Users the operator knows are minors: disclose that the user is interacting with AI; by default, a break reminder at least every three hours; measures against sexually explicit material — §22602(c). Deleted from 1 January 2027 by SB 1119, which replaces it with Chapter 11.6.
- Annual report to the Office of Suicide Prevention beginning 1 July 2027, with no user identifiers — §22603.
- Suitability disclosure that companion chatbots may not be suitable for some minors — §22604.
Enforcement
A person who suffers injury in fact may sue for injunctive relief, the greater of actual damages or $1,000 per violation, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs — §22605. The duties are cumulative to other law — §22606.
Contents
| Document | Covers |
|---|---|
| COMPANION-CHATBOTS.md | Bus. & Prof. Code §§22601–22606 as currently in force, each with its official history note |
Licence
The corpus reproduces Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§22601–22606 verbatim from the California Legislature's own database. Statute text enacted by a state legislature is outside copyright under the government edicts doctrine. In Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 590 U.S. 255 (2020) (slip opinion, read 2026-10-01), the Supreme Court held: "Under what has been dubbed the government edicts doctrine, officials empowered to speak with the force of law cannot be the authors of—and therefore cannot copyright—the works they create in the course of their official duties."
The Legislature's XML carries the comment "Copyright © Legislative Counsel Bureau, State of California." The Legislative Counsel Bureau is the Legislature's own drafting office, and the same opinion holds that "Because Georgia’s annotations are authored by an arm of the legislature in the course of its legislative duties, the government edicts doctrine puts them outside the reach of copyright protection." The notice cannot reach the statute text. The bulk-export readme (pubinfo_Readme.pdf, read 2026-10-13) states no copyright notice or terms of use.
Conditions: none attach to the statute text. The corpus names the official source in Sources and in each section's {.meta} provenance line, and its Meta section describes what it changed (anchors added, nothing reworded).
Related
- Adam's Law (SB 1119) — enacted 2026: amends §22602 and adds Chapter 11.6 on companion chatbots and children's safety
- SB 867 — enacted 2026: amends §22601 (adds "toy") and adds the §22604.5 toy moratorium
- N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law Art. 47 — New York's AI companion statute, in force since 2025-11-05
- CCPA minors — the opt-in rule for selling or sharing the personal information of consumers under 16
- COPPA — the federal under-13 regime binding operators