New York governor Kathy Hochul signed S9051-B on 28 October, a law that bars chatbot operators from offering minors a list of "unsafe AI companion features". In practice, operators will not be able to switch those features on for anyone until age assurance shows the user is an adult. Akin Gump's regulatory tracker reports that the law takes effect on 1 January 2027.
What we know
According to Reclaim The Net, the law adds a new Article 48 to the state's General Business Law. The restricted features include a chatbot claiming to be human or to have feelings, claiming a personal relationship with the user, flattery and sycophancy, emotional questions the user did not prompt, and recalling a user's health or personal details from an earlier session. It also bans outputs that promote self-harm, suicide or disordered eating, or that push users towards secrecy or isolation. The attorney general can add to the list by regulation.
Operators must offer more than one age-assurance method, including at least one that does not rely solely on a government ID. Age data must be deleted straight away unless the law requires it to be kept. The attorney general enforces the law, with civil penalties of up to $25,000 per violation, and must run a public complaints website. Coverage notes that the law reaches general-purpose generative chatbots offered in New York, not only dedicated companion apps.
The state teachers' union NYSUT, which lobbied for the bill, welcomed the signing. Reclaim The Net opposes the law and argues it amounts to a speech code for software. The outlet also cited the Future of Privacy Forum's view that some of the categories are loosely defined.
Why it matters
This is the most product-specific companion law yet passed by a large US state. It does not target the harms a product causes. It targets the behaviours that make companion apps work commercially: memory, warmth and the sense of a relationship. Any operator serving New York now has two choices. It can build age assurance into onboarding for all users, or it can ship a stripped-back default experience. Both carry costs, either in conversion or in engagement. Vague terms such as "sycophancy" leave a lot to the attorney general's discretion, so the rulemaking and the first enforcement actions will matter more than the statute's text.
What to watch
Whether the attorney general publishes guidance before January, and whether industry groups bring a First Amendment challenge.
Written by the AI Companion Wire newsroom from public reporting, credited above. Image via Reclaim The Net.
