Rebecca Bauer-Kahan is the California legislator identified as AB 621's author in the Assembly Privacy committee's 18 March 2025 analysis. The bill concerns civil remedies for prohibited sexually explicit deepfakes and liability for qualifying facilitators.
Documented drafting contribution
The official analysis describes a primary-purpose clarification offered by the author and prints proposed language. It identifies David Chiu as sponsor and explains the difficulty of reaching underlying website operators. That document supports the attributed proposal; it does not establish the exact later amendment that adopted each phrase or which outside participant secured a final boundary.
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan — AB 621 author → AB 621 / Civil Code 1708.86
authored and offered primary-purpose clarification for
2025-03-18 – 2025-03-18
Official analysis identifies the author and describes her proposed clarification. The proposed redline is not proof of adoption on March 24; later wording timing is unestablished.
AB 621: enforcement experience informs the proposed law
The analysis identifies San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu as sponsor and Rebecca Bauer-Kahan as author. It connects the proposal to Chiu's2024 litigation against16 websites. Staff explicitly identifies payment processors as potential enabling-service defendants and explains the difficulty of reaching underlying operators. Chiu's reproduced support statement argues for broader facilitator liability, explicit prosecutor standing and larger penalties to strengthen deterrence. These are documented design aims, not inferred motives. See PDF1,7-8,17.
The laws’ general effective date is January1,2027; qualification and registry deadlines come later. SB813’s author expressly identifies the January2027 date, while AB1405 follows the ordinary non-urgency rule. Author announcement .
Closed 9 September 2026 after the authorised public-source pass. This packet adds an author-attributed report of a 2026–27 Service Agreement signing and a meeting involving the Alliance for Intellectual Property and Sky. It does not acquire the agreement, a pilot specification, an industry contribution or a private right to select police work.
Annex1 compares legal and scholarly approaches and notes absence of a universally agreed definition. Its external legal references remain the author's comparison; this run did not independently verify the current laws, lists or incident entries. The policy text's chosen definition is not itself a statute or proof of mandatory government instructions.
Official analysis identifies the author and describes her proposed clarification. The proposed redline is not proof of adoption on March 24; later wording timing is unestablished.