California lawmakers recently passed SB 1047, a landmark artificial intelligence (AI) bill designed to establish comprehensive safeguards for tech companies developing large AI models. If signed into law, SB 1047 would impose significant new regulations on top AI firms, sparking resistance from major industry players like OpenAI, Meta, and Google.
Governor Gavin Newsom has yet to indicate whether he will sign or veto the bill, leaving the future of this legislation uncertain.
The bill has generated considerable debate, with proponents emphasizing the need for regulation in an increasingly AI-driven world. Salesforce CEO Mark Benioff highlighted the importance of AI safety during an interview with Yahoo Finance’s Brian Sozzi. “AI safety has to be a top priority for everyone to ensure these models don’t get out of control,” Benioff remarked. He acknowledged the significance of SB 1047, noting, “These kinds of ideas are incredibly interesting and need to be fully evaluated. And it’s worthwhile.”
The bill’s co-author, Democratic state senator Scott Wiener, explained that SB 1047 aims to formalize safety practices that some large AI labs, such as Meta, have already voluntarily adopted. The bill mandates that developers spending over $100 million to build an AI model must conduct rigorous safety testing before its release. If the testing reveals that the model could potentially cause “catastrophic harm,” developers are required to mitigate these risks.
Supporters of SB 1047 argue that such regulation is essential to address the potential dangers posed by advanced AI systems. Among the bill’s advocates are renowned AI experts Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, often referred to as the “Godfathers of AI.” They argue that the government has not done enough to manage the risks associated with AI technologies. Bengio, a professor of computer science at the University of Montreal, told Yahoo Finance, “SB 1047 is a much-needed step towards advancing both safety and long-term innovation in the AI ecosystem, especially incentivizing research and development in AI safety.”
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and founder of xAI, has also voiced his support for the bill, though he acknowledged the complexity of the issue. “I think California should probably pass the SB 1047 AI safety bill. For over 20 years, I have been an advocate for AI regulation, just as we regulate any product or technology that poses a potential risk to the public,” Musk wrote on X (formerly Twitter). Musk has previously called for a pause in the development of AI systems capable of rivaling human intelligence, citing their potential risks to society. However, he has also been a vocal critic of California’s state officials.
The bill is co-sponsored by several organizations, including the Center for AI Safety Action Fund, Economic Security California Action, and Encode Justice. Teri Olle, Director of Economic Security California Action, emphasized the need to hold Big Tech accountable. “It is long past due that we hold Big Tech accountable for their outsized influence and unchecked power,” Olle stated on the assembly floor. “We need legislative solutions like SB 1047 to flip the script and ensure the public can decide how critical technology benefits society as a whole.”
Public opinion appears to favor the bill. A recent poll by the Artificial Intelligence Policy Institute, a nonprofit organization advocating for safe AI development, found that 70% of Californians support SB 1047. Moreover, over 60% of respondents indicated they would hold Governor Newsom partly responsible for any future AI-related incidents if he vetoes the bill.
Despite the bill’s widespread support, it has faced opposition from some key figures in California politics. San Francisco Mayor London Breed, a longtime ally of Senator Wiener, announced her opposition to SB 1047. “I share your desire for AI to develop in a safe and sustainable way, and I agree with the overall intention of your legislation,” Breed wrote in a letter to Wiener. “With additional time and collaboration, I am confident we can find a solution that addresses many of the concerns raised in recent months while still enabling this emerging field to grow in a safe and sustainable way.” Breed’s stance aligns her with a growing number of California Democrats in Congress who oppose the measure, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and several other representatives.
To address concerns from various stakeholders, including Amazon-backed Anthropic, the bill was amended multiple times. Key changes include the removal of a state regulatory body known as the Frontier Model Division and the elimination of criminal penalties, although civil penalties remain. Additionally, open-source developers who spend less than $10 million fine-tuning an existing model will not be held liable; instead, the original developer of the model will bear responsibility. The Attorney General’s authority to seek civil penalties has also been limited to cases where “a harm has occurred or there is an imminent threat to public safety.”
Governor Newsom has until September 30 to decide the fate of SB 1047. When asked about the bill’s prospects, Senator Wiener expressed cautious optimism. “The governor has made statements that are very consistent with my own thinking — that regulation could be appropriate here, and we want to make sure we’re fostering innovation as well,” Wiener said. The outcome will have significant implications for the future of AI regulation not only in California but potentially across the nation.
