Does Hawaii Artificial Intelligence Disclosure and Safety Act (SB 3001) require Transparency & Disclosure?

Hawaii • enforcing

Yes — 1 provision

Requirements at a glance

This regulation imposes 4 specific requirements for Transparency & Disclosure across 1 provision:

AI Companion Artificiality Disclosure #

Obligation:
Transparency
enforcing
Effective:
Jul 14, 2026
Risk tier:
limited-risk
Scope:
Operators — persons who develop and make an AI companion available to the public; a mobile application store or search engine that merely provides access is not by itself an operator (§ (i)). An AI companion is a system using artificial intelligence, generative AI, or emotional recognition algorithms designed to simulate a sustained human or human-like relationship by retaining information on prior interactions and user preferences, asking unprompted emotion-based questions beyond a direct response, and sustaining ongoing dialogue on matters personal to the user (§ (i)). The minor cadence in § (b) applies where the operator has actual knowledge or reasonable certainty that the user is under eighteen
high-impact
The codified section number is not on the face of the act — Sec. 3 adds "a new section to part I" of ch. 481B "to be appropriately designated", so provisions are cited by the subsection letters (a) to (i) that do appear in the enacted text until the revisor publishes the number. Hawaii is the only 2026 state companion-AI statute already in force; Washington, California, Oregon and Nebraska all run from 2027. The minor cadence is the strictest in the cohort: at least once per hour, and the reminder must also tell the user to take a break from the chat, where Washington and Nebraska stop at a three-hour general interval. A persistent visible disclaimer under § (b)(1) is an accepted alternative to the whole session-start-plus-hourly cadence, which no other state in the cohort allows. The general disclosure in § (a) keeps a reasonable-person trigger, unlike Washington's unconditional duty.

Requirements

RequirementDetails
General artificiality notificationWhere a reasonable person interacting with the AI companion would be led to believe the person is interacting with a human, issue a clear and conspicuous notification indicating that the AI companion is artificial intelligence and not human (§ (a))
Minor disclosureWhere the operator has actual knowledge or reasonable certainty that a user is a minor, clearly and conspicuously disclose that the user is interacting with artificial intelligence (§ (b))
Persistent disclaimer alternativeThe minor disclosure may be satisfied by a persistent visible disclaimer (§ (b)(1))
Session-start and hourly cadenceOtherwise the disclosure must appear both at the beginning of each session and at least once per hour in a continuous AI companion interaction, and the hourly reminder must tell the user to take a break from the chat and that the conversation is artificially generated and not with a human (§ (b)(2)(A)-(B))

Penalties

ViolationFine
Unfair or deceptive act or practiceAny violation of the section is an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of trade or commerce within the meaning of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-2 (§ (f)). The act itself sets no penalty amount
EnforcementEnforced by the Office of Consumer Protection under the state's unfair and deceptive acts and practices authority
Private right of actionNone. Nothing in the section may be interpreted as creating a private right of action to enforce it, or as supporting a private right of action under any other law (§ (f))
Model developer shieldThe section creates no liability for the developer of an artificial intelligence model for a violation by an AI system developed by a third party to provide an AI companion (§ (g))
Cumulative dutiesThe duties, remedies and obligations imposed are cumulative to those imposed under other law and do not relieve an operator of any other duty (§ (h))
View full regulation View obligation Obligation matrix