S-0963
SC · State · USA
SC
USA
● Pending
South Carolina S 963 — Consumer Protections in Interactions with Artificial Intelligence Systems Act (adding Chapter 31 to Title 37)
Establishes the Consumer Protections in Interactions with Artificial Intelligence Systems Act, prohibiting algorithmic discrimination arising from the use of high-risk AI systems that make or substantially factor into consequential decisions (employment, housing, credit, insurance, healthcare, education, legal services, and government services). Developers must provide deployers with documentation covering intended uses, training data summaries, bias evaluation results, and data governance measures, and must publicly disclose the types of high-risk AI systems they offer and their risk management approaches. Deployers must implement a risk management program, complete annual impact assessments, notify consumers before consequential AI-driven decisions, provide adverse-decision explanations and appeal opportunities, and report discovered algorithmic discrimination to the Attorney General within 90 days. Enforcement is exclusively by the Attorney General as unfair trade practices; no private right of action is created. A small deployer exemption applies to deployers with fewer than 50 employees who do not use their own data to train the system.
Summary

Establishes the Consumer Protections in Interactions with Artificial Intelligence Systems Act, prohibiting algorithmic discrimination arising from the use of high-risk AI systems that make or substantially factor into consequential decisions (employment, housing, credit, insurance, healthcare, education, legal services, and government services). Developers must provide deployers with documentation covering intended uses, training data summaries, bias evaluation results, and data governance measures, and must publicly disclose the types of high-risk AI systems they offer and their risk management approaches. Deployers must implement a risk management program, complete annual impact assessments, notify consumers before consequential AI-driven decisions, provide adverse-decision explanations and appeal opportunities, and report discovered algorithmic discrimination to the Attorney General within 90 days. Enforcement is exclusively by the Attorney General as unfair trade practices; no private right of action is created. A small deployer exemption applies to deployers with fewer than 50 employees who do not use their own data to train the system.

Enforcement & Penalties
Enforcement Authority
The Attorney General has exclusive authority to enforce this chapter. Violations constitute unfair trade practices under Chapter 6 of Title 37. No private right of action is created. An affirmative defense is available if the developer, deployer, or other person discovers and cures a violation through user feedback, adversarial testing, red teaming, or internal review, and is otherwise in compliance with the NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, or another substantially equivalent risk management framework designated by the Attorney General. The developer, deployer, or other person bears the burden of demonstrating the affirmative defense is satisfied.
Penalties
Violations constitute unfair trade practices under Chapter 6 of Title 37 (South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act), which provides for injunctive relief and civil penalties available under that chapter. The bill itself does not specify independent penalty amounts. Rebuttable presumptions and affirmative defenses established under this chapter apply only to enforcement actions brought by the Attorney General and do not affect any right, claim, remedy, presumption, or defense available at law or in equity.
Who Is Covered
"Deployer" means a person doing business in this State that deploys a high-risk artificial intelligence system.
"Developer" means a person doing business in this State that develops or intentionally and substantially modifies an artificial intelligence system.
What Is Covered
"High-risk artificial intelligence system" means any artificial intelligence system that, when deployed, makes or is a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision. "High-risk artificial intelligence system" does not include: (i) an artificial intelligence system if the artificial intelligence system is intended to: (A) perform a narrow procedural task; (B) detect decision-making patterns or deviations from prior decision-marking patterns and is not intended to replace or influence a previously completed human assessment without sufficient human review; or (C) the following technologies, unless the technologies, when deployed, make or are a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision: (1) antimalware; (2) antivirus; (3) artificial intelligence-enabled video games; (4) calculators; (5) cybersecurity; (6) databases; (7) data storage; (8) firewall; (9) internet domain registration; (10) internet website loading; (11) networking; (12) spam and robocall filtering; (13) spell-checking; (14) spreadsheets; (15) web caching; (16) web hosting or any similar technology; or (17) technology that communicates with consumers in natural language for the purpose of providing users with information, making referrals or recommendations, and answering questions and is subject to an accepted use policy that prohibits generating content that is discriminatory or harmful.
Compliance Obligations 16 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page
H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.3 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(A)
Plain Language
Developers of high-risk AI systems must exercise reasonable care to protect consumers from known or reasonably foreseeable algorithmic discrimination — unlawful differential treatment or impact disfavoring individuals based on protected characteristics. This is a general duty standard, not a checklist. Developers receive a rebuttable presumption of compliance in AG enforcement actions if they have complied with this section and any rules the AG adopts. Self-testing for bias and diversity-expansion uses are carved out from the definition of algorithmic discrimination.
Statutory Text
(A) A developer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall use reasonable care to protect consumers from any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination arising from the intended and contracted uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system. In any enforcement action brought by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 37-31-60, there is a rebuttable presumption that a developer used reasonable care as required under this section if the developer complied with this section and any additional requirements or obligations as set forth in rules adopted by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 37-31-70.
G-02 Public Transparency & Documentation · G-02.1 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(B)
Plain Language
Developers must provide deployers (and other downstream developers) with comprehensive documentation covering: intended and harmful uses, training data summaries, known limitations and discrimination risks, purpose and benefits, pre-deployment bias evaluation methodology, data governance measures, intended outputs, discrimination mitigation steps, and human oversight guidance. This is a developer-to-deployer disclosure obligation — not a public-facing requirement. The trade secret exception in subsection (F) applies.
Statutory Text
(B) Except as provided in subsection (F), a developer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall make available to the deployer or other developer of the high-risk artificial intelligence system: (1) a general statement describing the reasonably foreseeable uses and known harmful or inappropriate uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (2) documentation disclosing: (a) high-level summaries of the type of data used to train the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (b) known or reasonably foreseeable limitations of the high-risk artificial intelligence system, including known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination arising from the intended uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (c) the purpose of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (d) the intended benefits and uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; and (e) all other information necessary to allow the deployer to comply with the requirements of Section 37-31-30; (3) documentation describing: (a) how the high-risk artificial intelligence system was evaluated for performance and mitigation of algorithmic discrimination before the high-risk artificial intelligence system was offered, sold, leased, licensed, given, or otherwise made available to the deployer; (b) the data governance measures used to cover the training datasets and the measures used to examine the suitability of data sources, possible biases, and appropriate mitigation; (c) the intended outputs of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (d) the measures the developer has taken to mitigate known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination that may arise from the reasonably foreseeable deployment of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; and (e) how the high-risk artificial intelligence system should be used, not be used, and be monitored by an individual when the high-risk artificial intelligence system is used to make, or is a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision; and (4) any additional documentation that is reasonably necessary to assist the deployer in understanding the outputs and monitor the performance of the high-risk artificial intelligence system for risks of algorithmic discrimination.
G-02 Public Transparency & Documentation · G-02.1 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(C)
Plain Language
Developers must supply deployers with the documentation — such as model cards, dataset cards, or impact assessments — needed for the deployer to complete its own impact assessment. This obligation is qualified by feasibility. A developer that is also the sole deployer of a system does not need to generate this documentation unless the system is provided to an unaffiliated deployer.
Statutory Text
(C)(1) Except as provided in subsection (F), a developer that offers, sells, leases, licenses, gives, or otherwise makes available to a deployer or other developer a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall make available to the deployer or other developer, to the extent feasible, the documentation and information, through artifacts such as model cards, dataset cards, or other impact assessments, necessary for a deployer, or for a third party contracted by a deployer, to complete an impact assessment pursuant to Section 37-31-30(C). (2) A developer that also serves as a deployer for a high-risk artificial intelligence system is not required to generate the documentation required by this section unless the high-risk artificial intelligence system is provided to an unaffiliated entity acting as a deployer.
G-02 Public Transparency & Documentation · G-02.4 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(D)
Plain Language
Developers must publicly post on their website or in a public-use case inventory a summary of the types of high-risk AI systems they make available and how they manage discrimination risks. This statement must be kept current and updated within 90 days of any intentional and substantial modification to a covered system. This is a public-facing transparency obligation distinct from the deployer-facing documentation in subsection (B).
Statutory Text
(D)(1) A developer shall make available, in a manner that is clear and readily available on the developer's website or in a public-use case inventory, a statement summarizing: (a) the types of high-risk artificial intelligence systems that the developer has developed or intentionally and substantially modified and currently makes available to a deployer or other developer; and (b) how the developer manages known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination that may arise from the development or intentional and substantial modification of the types of high-risk artificial intelligence systems described in accordance with item (1)(a). (2) A developer shall update the statement described in item (1): (a) as necessary to ensure that the statement remains accurate; and (b) no later than ninety days after the developer intentionally and substantially modifies any high-risk artificial intelligence system described in item (1)(a).
R-01 Incident Reporting · R-01.3 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(E)
Plain Language
Developers must notify both the Attorney General and all known deployers within 90 days of discovering — through their own testing or a credible deployer report — that their high-risk AI system has caused or is reasonably likely to have caused algorithmic discrimination. This is a mandatory disclosure triggered by actual or likely discrimination, not a routine reporting obligation. The AG prescribes the form and manner of disclosure.
Statutory Text
(E) A developer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall disclose to the Attorney General, in a form and manner prescribed by the Attorney General, and to all known deployers or other developers of the high-risk artificial intelligence system, any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination arising from the intended uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system without unreasonable delay but no later than ninety days after the date on which: (1) the developer discovers through the developer's ongoing testing and analysis that the developer's high-risk artificial intelligence system has been deployed and has caused or is reasonably likely to have caused algorithmic discrimination; or (2) the developer receives from a deployer a credible report that the high-risk artificial intelligence system has been deployed and has caused algorithmic discrimination.
R-02 Regulatory Disclosure & Submissions · R-02.2 · Developer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-20(G)
Plain Language
Upon request from the Attorney General, a developer must produce the deployer-facing documentation described in subsection (B) within 90 days. The documentation is exempt from South Carolina FOIA and may be designated as containing proprietary information or trade secrets. Attorney-client privilege and work-product protection are preserved. This is a responsive obligation — not a proactive filing requirement.
Statutory Text
(G) The Attorney General may require that a developer disclose to the Attorney General, no later than ninety days after the request and in a form and manner prescribed by the Attorney General, the statement or documentation described in subsection (B). The Attorney General may evaluate such statement or documentation to ensure compliance with this chapter, and the statement or documentation is not subject to disclosure under the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act. In a disclosure made pursuant to this subsection, a developer may designate the statement or documentation as including proprietary information or a trade secret. To the extent that any information contained in the statement or documentation includes information subject to attorney-client privilege or work-product protection, the disclosure does not constitute a waiver of the privilege or protection.
H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.3 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(A)
Plain Language
Deployers of high-risk AI systems must exercise reasonable care to protect consumers from known or reasonably foreseeable algorithmic discrimination. A rebuttable presumption of compliance applies in AG enforcement actions if the deployer has complied with this section and any AG-adopted rules. This mirrors the developer duty in § 37-31-20(A) but applies at the deployment stage.
Statutory Text
(A) A deployer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall use reasonable care to protect consumers from any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination. In any enforcement action brought by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 37-31-70, there is a rebuttable presumption that a deployer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system used reasonable care as required under this section if the deployer complied with this section and any additional requirements or obligations as set forth in rules adopted by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 37-31-70.
G-01 AI Governance Program & Documentation · G-01.1G-01.2 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(B)
Plain Language
Deployers must establish and maintain a risk management policy and program covering the identification, documentation, and mitigation of algorithmic discrimination risks. The program must specify principles, processes, and personnel, and must be iteratively reviewed and updated over the system's lifecycle. Reasonableness is assessed considering the NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, or an AG-designated framework, as well as the deployer's size, system scope, and data sensitivity. A single program may cover multiple high-risk AI systems. The small deployer exemption in subsection (F) applies.
Statutory Text
(B)(1) Except as provided in subsection (F), a deployer of a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall implement a risk management policy and program to govern the deployer's deployment of the high-risk artificial intelligence system. The risk management policy and program must specify and incorporate the principles, processes, and personnel that the deployer uses to identify, document, and mitigate known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination. The risk management policy and program must be an iterative process planned, implemented, and regularly and systematically reviewed and updated over the life cycle of a high-risk artificial intelligence system, requiring regular, systematic review and updates. A risk management policy and program implemented and maintained pursuant to this subsection must be reasonable considering: (a)(i) The guidance and standards set forth in the latest version of the "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework" published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States Department of Commerce, standard ISO/IEC 42001 of the International Organization for Standardization, or another nationally or internationally recognized risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems, if the standards are substantially equivalent to or more stringent than the requirements of this chapter; or (ii) any risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems that the Attorney General, in his discretion, may designate; (b) the size and complexity of the deployer; (c) the nature and scope of the high-risk artificial intelligence systems deployed by the deployer, including the intended uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence systems; and (d) the sensitivity and volume of data processed in connection with the high-risk artificial intelligence systems deployed by the deployer. (2) A risk management policy and program implemented pursuant to item (1) may cover multiple high-risk artificial intelligence systems deployed by the deployer.
H-02 Non-Discrimination & Bias Assessment · H-02.3H-02.8H-02.10 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(C)
Plain Language
Deployers must complete an impact assessment for each high-risk AI system before deployment and update it at least annually and within 90 days of any intentional and substantial modification. The assessment must cover system purpose, algorithmic discrimination risk analysis with mitigation steps, input/output data categories, performance metrics and limitations, transparency measures, and post-deployment monitoring safeguards. A single assessment may cover comparable systems, and assessments completed for other laws that are reasonably similar in scope satisfy this requirement. All impact assessments and records must be retained for at least three years after final deployment. Separately, deployers must conduct an annual review of each deployed system to confirm it is not causing algorithmic discrimination. The small deployer exemption in subsection (F) applies.
Statutory Text
(C)(1) Except as provided in items (4), (5), and subsection (F) of this section: (a) a deployer, or a third party contracted by the deployer, that deploys a high-risk artificial intelligence system shall complete an impact assessment for the high-risk artificial intelligence system; and (b) a deployer, or a third party contracted by the deployer, shall complete an impact assessment for a deployed high-risk artificial intelligence system at least annually and within ninety days after any intentional and substantial modification to the high-risk artificial intelligence system is made available. (2) An impact assessment completed pursuant to this subsection must include, at a minimum, and to the extent reasonably known by or available to the deployer: (a) a statement by the deployer disclosing the purpose, intended-use cases, and deployment context of, and benefits afforded by, the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (b) an analysis of whether the deployment of the high-risk artificial intelligence system poses any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination and, if so, the nature of the algorithmic discrimination and the steps that have been taken to mitigate the risks; (c) a description of the categories of data the high-risk artificial intelligence system processes as inputs and the outputs the high-risk artificial intelligence system produces; (d) if the deployer used data to customize the high-risk artificial intelligence system, an overview of the categories of data the deployer used to customize the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (e) any metrics used to evaluate the performance and known limitations of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; (f) a description of any transparency measures taken concerning the high-risk artificial intelligence system, including any measures taken to disclose to a consumer that the high-risk artificial intelligence system is in use when the high-risk artificial intelligence system is in use; and (g) a description of the postdeployment monitoring and user safeguards provided concerning the high-risk artificial intelligence system, including the oversight, use, and learning process established by the deployer to address issues arising from the deployment of the high-risk artificial intelligence system. (3) In addition to the information required under item (2), an impact assessment completed pursuant to this item following an intentional and substantial modification to a high-risk artificial intelligence system must include a statement disclosing the extent to which the high-risk artificial intelligence system was used in a manner that was consistent with, or varied from, the developer's intended uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system. (4) A single impact assessment may address a comparable set of high-risk artificial intelligence systems deployed by a deployer. (5) If a deployer, or a third party contracted by the deployer, completes an impact assessment for the purpose of complying with another applicable law or regulation, the impact assessment satisfies the requirements established in this subsection if the impact assessment is reasonably similar in scope and effect to the impact assessment that would otherwise be completed pursuant to this subsection. (6) A deployer shall maintain the most recently completed impact assessment for a high-risk artificial intelligence system as required under this subsection, all records concerning each impact assessment, and all prior impact assessments, if any, for at least three years following the final deployment of the high-risk artificial intelligence system. (7) At least annually, a deployer, or a third party contracted by the deployer, must review the deployment of each high-risk artificial intelligence system deployed by the deployer to ensure that the high-risk artificial intelligence system is not causing algorithmic discrimination.
H-01 Human Oversight of Automated Decisions · H-01.1H-01.2H-01.3H-01.4H-01.5 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(D)
Plain Language
Before making a consequential decision using a high-risk AI system, deployers must notify the consumer that AI will be used, disclose the system's purpose and the nature of the decision, provide deployer contact information, and inform the consumer of any opt-out rights. If the decision is adverse, the deployer must additionally provide: the principal reasons for the decision (including how the AI contributed, what data types were used, and their sources), an opportunity to correct inaccurate personal data, and an opportunity to appeal with human review if technically feasible. All notices must be delivered directly, in plain language, in all languages the deployer normally uses for business communications, and in disability-accessible formats. If direct delivery is impossible, the deployer must use a method reasonably calculated to reach the consumer.
Statutory Text
(D)(1) No later than the time that a deployer deploys a high-risk artificial intelligence system to make, or be a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision concerning a consumer, the deployer shall: (a) notify the consumer that the deployer has deployed a high-risk artificial intelligence system to make, or be a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision before the decision is made; (b) provide to the consumer a statement disclosing the purpose of the high-risk artificial intelligence system and the nature of the consequential decision; the contact information for the deployer; a description, in plain language, of the high-risk artificial intelligence system; and instructions on how to access the statement required by this item; and (c) provide to the consumer information, if applicable, regarding the consumer's right to opt out of the processing of personal data concerning the consumer for purposes of profiling in furtherance of decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects concerning the consumer pursuant to Section 30-31-60(A)(1)(a)(iii). (2) A deployer that has deployed a high-risk artificial intelligence system to make, or be a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision concerning a consumer shall, if the consequential decision is adverse to the consumer, provide to the consumer: (a) a statement disclosing the principal reason or reasons for the consequential decision, including: (i) the degree to which, and manner in which, the high-risk artificial intelligence system contributed to the consequential decision; (ii) the type of data that was processed by the high-risk artificial intelligence system in making the consequential decision; and (iii) the source or sources of the data described in item (2)(a)(ii); (b) an opportunity to correct any incorrect personal data that the high-risk artificial intelligence system processed in making, or as a substantial factor in making, the consequential decision; and (c) an opportunity to appeal an adverse consequential decision concerning the consumer arising from the deployment of a high-risk artificial intelligence system, which appeal must, if technically feasible, allow for human review unless providing the opportunity for appeal is not in the best interest of the consumer, including in instances in which any delay might pose a risk to the life or safety of such consumer. (3)(a) Except as provided in subitem (b), a deployer shall provide the notice, statement, contact information, and description required by items (1) and (2): (i) directly to the consumer; (ii) in plain language; (iii) in all languages in which the deployer, in the ordinary course of the deployer's business, provides contracts, disclaimers, sale announcements, and other information to consumers; and (iv) in a format that is accessible to consumers with disabilities. (b) If the deployer is unable to provide the notice, statement, contact information, and description required by items (1) and (2) directly to the consumer, the deployer shall make the notice, statement, contact information, and description available in a manner that is reasonably calculated to ensure that the consumer receives the notice, statement, contact information, and description.
G-02 Public Transparency & Documentation · G-02.4 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(E)
Plain Language
Deployers must publish and periodically update on their website a clear summary of: the types of high-risk AI systems they deploy, how they manage algorithmic discrimination risks for each, and detailed information about the nature, source, and extent of information collected and used. The small deployer exemption in subsection (F) applies.
Statutory Text
(E)(1) Except as provided in subsection (F), a deployer shall make available, in a manner that is clear and readily available on the deployer's website, a statement summarizing: (a) the types of high-risk artificial intelligence systems that are currently deployed by the deployer; (b) how the deployer manages known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination that may arise from the deployment of each high-risk artificial intelligence system described pursuant to subitem (a); and (c) in detail, the nature, source, and extent of the information collected and used by the deployer. (2) A deployer shall periodically update the statement described in item (1) of this section.
R-01 Incident Reporting · R-01.3 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(G)
Plain Language
Deployers who discover that a deployed high-risk AI system has caused algorithmic discrimination must report the discovery to the Attorney General within 90 days in a form prescribed by the AG. This is a mandatory incident-triggered obligation — not a routine periodic filing.
Statutory Text
(G) If a deployer deploys a high-risk artificial intelligence system and subsequently discovers that the high-risk artificial intelligence system has caused algorithmic discrimination, the deployer, without unreasonable delay, but no later than ninety days after the date of the discovery, shall send to the Attorney General, in a form and manner prescribed by him, a notice disclosing the discovery.
R-02 Regulatory Disclosure & Submissions · R-02.2 · Deployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-30(I)
Plain Language
Upon request by the Attorney General, deployers must produce their risk management policy, impact assessments, and associated records within 90 days. These materials are exempt from South Carolina FOIA and may be designated as containing proprietary information or trade secrets. Attorney-client privilege and work-product protection are preserved. This requires maintaining documentation in a form that can be produced on demand.
Statutory Text
(I) The Attorney General may require that a deployer, or a third party contracted by the deployer, disclose to him, no later than ninety days after the request and in a form and manner prescribed by him, the risk management policy implemented pursuant to subsection (B), the impact assessment completed pursuant to subsection (C), or the records maintained pursuant to subsection (C)(6). The Attorney General may evaluate the risk management policy, impact assessment, or records to ensure compliance with this chapter, and the risk management policy, impact assessment, and records are not subject to disclosure under the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act. In a disclosure made pursuant to this subsection, a deployer may designate the statement or documentation as including proprietary information or a trade secret. To the extent that any information contained in the risk management policy, impact assessment, or records includes information subject to attorney-client privilege or work-product protection, the disclosure does not constitute a waiver of the privilege or protection.
T-01 AI Identity Disclosure · T-01.1 · DeveloperDeployer · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-40(A)-(B)
Plain Language
Deployers and developers that make available an AI system intended to interact with consumers must disclose to each consumer that they are interacting with an AI system. This obligation applies broadly to any consumer-facing AI system — not just high-risk systems. The disclosure is not required where it would be obvious to a reasonable person that they are interacting with AI. Note this is the inverse of the CA SB 243 pattern: here the default is disclosure required unless obviously AI, rather than disclosure required only when a reasonable person might be misled.
Statutory Text
(A) Except as provided in subsection (B), a deployer or other developer that deploys, offers, sells, leases, licenses, gives, or otherwise makes available an artificial intelligence system that is intended to interact with consumers shall ensure the disclosure to each consumer who interacts with the artificial intelligence system that the consumer is interacting with an artificial intelligence system. (B) Disclosure is not required under subsection (A) under circumstances in which it would be obvious to a reasonable person that the person is interacting with an artificial intelligence system.
Other · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-60
Plain Language
This provision establishes the enforcement architecture for the entire chapter. The Attorney General has exclusive enforcement authority; violations are classified as unfair trade practices under South Carolina's existing UTPA (Chapter 6, Title 37). An affirmative defense is available where the entity discovered and cured a violation through user feedback, adversarial testing, red teaming, or internal review, and is in compliance with the NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, or an equivalent framework. No private right of action is created, but existing common law and equitable claims are expressly preserved. This provision creates no new compliance obligation of its own.
Statutory Text
(1) Notwithstanding Section 37-31-30, the Attorney General has exclusive authority to enforce this chapter. (2) Except as provided in item (3), a violation of the requirements established in this chapter constitutes an unfair trade practice pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 6 of this title. (3) In any action commenced by the Attorney General to enforce this chapter, it is an affirmative defense that the developer, deployer, or other person: (a) discovers and cures a violation of this chapter as a result of: (i) feedback that the developer, deployer, or other person encourages deployers or users to provide to the developer, deployer, or other person; (ii) adversarial testing or red teaming, as those terms are defined or used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology; or (iii) an internal review process; and (b) is otherwise in compliance with: (i) the latest version of the "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework" published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States Department of Commerce and standard ISO/IEC 42001 of the International Organization for Standardization; (ii) another nationally or internationally recognized risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems, if the standards are substantially equivalent to or more stringent than the requirements of this chapter; or (iii) any risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems that the Attorney General, in his discretion, may designate and, if designated, shall publicly disseminate. (4) A developer, a deployer, or other person bears the burden of demonstrating to the Attorney General that the requirements established in item (3) have been satisfied. (5) Nothing in this chapter, including the enforcement authority granted to the Attorney General under this section, preempts or otherwise affects any right, claim, remedy, presumption, or defense available at law or in equity. A rebuttable presumption or affirmative defense established under this chapter applies only to an enforcement action brought by the Attorney General pursuant to this section and does not apply to any right, claim, remedy, presumption, or defense available at law or in equity. (6) This chapter does not provide the basis for, and is not subject to, a private right of action for violations of this chapter or any other law.
Other · Automated Decisionmaking
S.C. Code § 37-31-70
Plain Language
The Attorney General is authorized to promulgate implementing rules covering developer documentation, notice and disclosure requirements, risk management program content, impact assessment content, rebuttable presumption criteria, and affirmative defense requirements. This is a delegation of rulemaking authority and creates no independent compliance obligation for developers or deployers.
Statutory Text
The Attorney General may promulgate rules as necessary for the purpose of implementing and enforcing this chapter, including: (1) the documentation and requirements for developers pursuant to Section 37-31-20(B); (2) the contents of and requirements for the notices and disclosures required by Sections 37-31-20(E) and (G); 37-31-30(D), (E), (F), and (H); and 37-31-40; (3) the content and requirements of the risk management policy and program required by Section 37-31-30(B); (4) the content and requirements of the impact assessments required by Section 37-31-30(C); (5) the requirements for the rebuttable presumptions set forth in Sections 37-31-20 and 37-31-30; and (6) the requirements for the affirmative defense set forth in Section 37-31-60(C), including the process by which the Attorney General will recognize any other nationally or internationally recognized risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems.