Comparison · California and the EU
SB 942 vs EU AI Act Article 50, side by side
Updated 20 October 2026. California SB 942 as amended by AB 853, SB 1000 and AB 2713, and Article 50 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Not legal advice.
Three differences that matter
- Both put the marking duty on whoever builds the generating system, and both have applied since 2 August 2026.
- SB 942 says what the hidden mark must contain. Article 50 says only that it must be machine-readable and detectable.
- Article 50 covers text; SB 942 does not. Neither asks the provider for a visible label.
The two laws, side by side
Who must mark
A covered provider: anyone who creates, codes or otherwise produces a generative AI system that is publicly accessible in California.
§ 22757.1(e)Providers of AI systems, including general-purpose AI systems, that generate synthetic audio, image, video or text.
Art. 50(2)Size threshold
None. SB 1000 deleted the former 1,000,000 monthly users threshold on 30 September 2026.
§ 22757.1(e), as amended by SB 1000No user threshold in the text of Article 50(2). For SMEs and start-ups, the lower of the two maximum fines applies.
Art. 50(2); Art. 99(4)Content that must be marked
Image, video and audio created or altered by the system, except by minor modification. Text is not covered.
§ 22757.3(a)Synthetic audio, image, video and text.
Art. 50(2)Visible label
Not required. SB 1000 deleted the option of a manifest (visible) disclosure.
§ 22757.3, as amended by SB 1000Not required from the provider. Deployers must disclose deep fakes, and AI-generated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest.
Art. 50(4)What the mark must contain
The provider's name; the system's name and version; the time and date; a unique identifier; and whether the system created or altered the content. From 1 January 2029, also whether the system is designed primarily as assistive technology. Directly, or through a link to a permanent website.
§ 22757.3(a)No fields. The output must be marked in a machine-readable format and detectable as artificially generated or manipulated, and the mark need not identify any person.
Art. 50(2)Technology and robustness
No technology named. Permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove, compatible with the provider's verification tool, and compliant or interoperable with widely recognized industry standards.
§ 22757.3(a)No technology named. Effective, interoperable, robust and reliable as far as technically feasible. The Code of Practice sets out a layered mark for signatories.
Art. 50(2); Code of PracticeDetection
A free, publicly accessible disclosure verification tool with upload, URL input and an API. It may be a compliant third-party tool reachable from the provider's interface.
§ 22757.2The output must be detectable as AI-generated. Code of Practice signatories commit to free detection, interoperable by 2 February 2027.
Art. 50(2); Code of PracticePersonal information
The verification tool must not output personal information unless the person it pertains to expressly consents.
§ 22757.2The mark need not identify any person.
Art. 50(2)Others in the chain
Licensees: 72 hours to act once a known licensee's system no longer complies. Large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms from 1 January 2027; capture device manufacturers from 1 January 2028.
§ 22757.3(b); § 22757.3.1Duties fall on providers (50(1), 50(2)) and deployers (50(3), 50(4)).
Art. 50Exemptions
Products or services that provide exclusively non-user-generated videogames; before 1 January 2029, systems designed primarily as assistive technology.
§ 22757.5Assistive functions for standard editing; systems that do not substantially alter the input data or its semantics; uses authorised by law to detect, prevent, investigate or prosecute criminal offences.
Art. 50(2)When it applies
Provider duties since 2 August 2026, as amended by SB 1000 from 30 September 2026. Platforms from 1 January 2027; capture devices from 1 January 2028.
AB 853; SB 1000Since 2 August 2026. Systems already on the market before then have until 2 December 2026.
Art. 113Penalty and enforcement
$5,000 per violation; each day a violation continues is a separate violation. Enforced by the Attorney General, county counsel or a city attorney.
§ 22757.4Up to EUR 15,000,000 or 3% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher; the lower of the two for SMEs and start-ups. Enforced by national market surveillance authorities.
Art. 99(4)Sources: SB 942, chaptered text, as amended by AB 853, SB 1000 and AB 2713; Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 50, with the Commission's Code of Practice. For the detail of each side, see the SB 942 sections and euaiactcompliance.org.
Common questions
What is the difference between SB 942 and the EU AI Act?
Both require the provider of a generative AI system to mark its output, and both have applied since 2 August 2026. SB 942 specifies what the hidden mark must contain (provider, system and version, time and date, a unique identifier, and whether the content was created or altered) and requires a free public verification tool. Article 50(2) of the EU AI Act requires only that the output be machine-readable and detectable as AI-generated, and it also covers text.
Does SB 942 apply to AI-generated text?
No. The SB 942 latent disclosure applies to image, video and audio content. Article 50(2) of the EU AI Act does cover synthetic text.
Do SB 942 or the EU AI Act require a visible AI label?
Not from the provider. SB 1000 deleted SB 942's option of a manifest (visible) disclosure. Under the EU AI Act, visible disclosure is a deployer duty under Article 50(4), for deep fakes and for AI-generated text published to inform the public on matters of public interest.
Can one watermark meet both SB 942 and Article 50?
Neither law names a technology. Article 50(2) asks for a machine-readable mark that is detectable as AI-generated; SB 942 asks that the mark convey its listed fields, directly or through a link to a permanent website, and be readable by a free verification tool. Nothing in either text prevents one mark from doing both.
Other sections
Who is covered
Anyone producing a generative AI system the public can use in California, whatever its size. The exemptions are narrow.
Who is covered → § 22757.3(a)The latent disclosure
The hidden label image, video and audio output must carry, field by field.
The five fields → § 22757.2, § 22757.3(b)Verification tool and licensees
The free tool anyone can use to check your content, and the 72-hour licensee clock.
Tool and licensees → AB 853, AB 2713Platforms, hosts and capture devices
Duties for large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms from 2027, and capture device makers from 2028.
AB 853 duties → TimelineDates and penalties
Every operative date from 2024 to 2029, and the $5,000 per day civil penalty.
Dates and penalties →