A term or concept · 2024 · AI
The AI Age Act and companion rules
Legislative proposals in the US and EU that would restrict emotional attachment to minors specifically, rather than restricting the product generally.
The first regulatory attempt to regulate the attachment rather than the technology, which is the correct target and almost certainly the wrong approach. You cannot outlaw a feeling without a definition of it.
Consideration. The part where somebody stops and thinks. The research, the diagnosis, the ethics, the lawsuits, the regulators. Roughly fifty years of arguing with itself about whether this is a relationship.
Where it sits
2010 2010+ · 2024 2026
Provenance · 2 source record(s)
- retrievableThe enacted law, quoted from the chaptered text rather than from coverage. Section 22601(b)(1) defines a companion chatbot as a system with a natural language interface giving 'adaptive, human-like responses' that is 'capable of meeting a user's social needs, including by exhibiting anthropomorphic features and being able to sustain a relationship across multiple interactions' - a behavioural test, with nothing in it about how the user feels. Exclusions cover customer service and business use (b)(2)(A), video-game bots limited to the game (B), and voice assistants that do not sustain a relationship or generate outputs 'likely to elicit emotional responses' (C). 22602(a): clear and conspicuous AI notification, but only where a reasonable person would be misled into thinking the other end human. 22602(b): a protocol preventing suicidal ideation, suicide or self-harm output, with referral to crisis services, published on the operator's website. 22602(c), for a user known to be a minor: disclose interacting with AI; a break-and-identity reminder at least every three hours; and measures against sexually explicit conduct. 22604: disclose that companion chatbots may not suit some minors. 22603: annual reporting to the Office of Suicide Prevention from 1 July 2027, evidence-based measurement, no personal data. 22605: private right of action, damages the greater of actual loss or $1,000 per violation, plus fees.California Senate Bill 243 (Padilla), Companion chatbots. Chapter 677, approved and filed with the Secretary of State 13 October 2025. Adds Chapter 22.6 (commencing with Section 22601) to Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code. Text read from the official chaptered bill on leginfo. ↗
- retrievableThe author's own account of the signing, 13 October 2025, with Padilla's stated rationale that 'left to their own devices the Tech Industry is incentivized to capture young people's attention and hold it at the expense of their real world relationships', and the bill's bipartisan path through the legislature. Recorded as context for intent. NOT used as evidence of the statute's requirements: this release, like most coverage of SB 243, lists a ban on rewards issued at unpredictable intervals, which does not appear in the chaptered text.Padilla, S., California State Senator. First-in-the-Nation AI Chatbot Safeguards Signed into Law. Senate District 18 press release, 13 October 2025. ↗
COMPANION The companion chatbot
Connected · 2 out, 0 in
Character.AIcites · 2022 · An event or momentConsent in one-sided attachmentcites · 2020 · A term or concept
Reported as a story
The EU is about to rewrite what a companion app is allowed to do to a childProposed rules would bar AI companions from building emotional attachment with minors. Fines up to 6% of global revenue.A journalist spent a week with a Replika companion and came back unsettledYahoo's reviewer understood the appeal in a way most critics refuse to.Safety experts say companion apps need better guardrails than they haveABC on Replika and isolation. The concern is not the chatbot, it is what replaces it.
It sits in