A national technology trade group is urging Florida lawmakers to reject Senate Bill 482, arguing the proposal would impose unclear regulations on artificial intelligence that could chill innovation, restrict lawful speech, and expose companies to expansive liability.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) said in a letter sent to the Florida Senate this month that SB 482, branded as an “Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights,” goes far beyond targeted consumer protection and instead creates a fragmented regulatory regime at odds with federal and international approaches to AI governance.
While acknowledging the Legislature’s interest in protecting minors, privacy, and consumers, the group said the bill relies on overly broad definitions of artificial intelligence, bots, and companion chatbots that would sweep in a wide range of common digital tools, including educational platforms, workplace software, accessibility technologies, and moderation systems. Treating those tools as functionally equivalent, the association warned, makes compliance difficult and encourages companies to scale back features or withdraw services from Florida altogether.
“Artificial intelligence systems are developed, trained, and deployed on a national and global scale. Fragmented state laws make it challenging for a company to deploy more features and services in a particular state, and risk undermining online free expression,” said CCIA State Policy Manager Tom Mann. “Rather than aligning with risk-based AI approaches, SB 482 would create a standalone state framework that increases compliance burdens without delivering clear safety benefits.”
Much of the opposition focuses on the bill’s provisions regulating “companion chatbot platforms,” particularly as they apply to minors.
The bill would require parental consent for minor accounts, allow parents to access all chatbot interactions, mandate repeated disclosures that users are interacting with artificial intelligence, and impose monitoring obligations tied to self-harm or harmful content. The group argued those requirements, paired with civil penalties, punitive damages, and private lawsuits, would push platforms to simply block minors rather than risk liability.
The trade group also criticized the bill’s enforcement structure, which authorizes significant penalties for “knowing or reckless” violations — standards it described as undefined and subjective. According to the association, the threat of litigation would fall most heavily on startups and smaller firms that lack the resources to navigate prolonged legal uncertainty.
In addition, the group raised concerns about amendments expanding liability for AI-generated use of a person’s name, image, or likeness, warning the bill could shift responsibility from bad actors to technology providers that lack control over third-party misuse.