They’re basically minimum-viable products that by design can be used to violate the law in California when the Act goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2027.

  • jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    AB 1043 passed the California Assembly 76–0 and the Senate 38–0. Not a single legislator voted against it.

    1798.503. (a) A person that violates this title shall be subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty of not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per affected child for each negligent violation or not more than seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per affected child for each intentional violation

    This device does not collect, store, or transmit the age of its user. This is intentional.

    Is there any reason to believe they won’t want to make an example out of intentional violators?

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Brilliant. I’d like to see how the very uninformed legislators deal with this. They will have to publically re-argue first principles

    • groet@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Why though? How does this force anybody to do anything? They will fine anybody 2500$ for handing this to a kid and call it a day. Maybe even move closer to the maximum fine because it is a deliberate breaking of the law.