Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Senate Bill

SB 384: Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act: prohibition on certain price-setting algorithm uses.

Passed one chamber Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

SB 384 is a senate bill introduced in the California Senate on February 14, 2025. According to its official title, it concerns: Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act: prohibition on certain price-setting algorithm uses. Primary sponsor: Aisha Wahab (D). Most recent recorded action (August 29, 2025): August 29 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law governs various business practices in this state, including certain laws relating to the use of technology. Existing law, commonly known as the Cartwright Act, identifies certain acts that are unlawful restraints of trade and unlawful trusts and prescribes provisions for its enforcement through civil actions.

This bill, the Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act, would prohibit a person from selling, licensing, providing, or using a price-setting algorithm, as defined, with the intent or reasonable expectation that it be used by 2 or more competitors, as defined, in the same market if the person knows or should know that the algorithm processes nonpublic data, as defined, to set either: (1) a price or supply level of a good or service or (2) a rent or occupancy level of rental property. The bill would provide a user of a price-setting algorithm an affirmative defense to liability if the user exercised reasonable due diligence, as specified. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or a district attorney, city attorney, or county counsel to file a civil action for violations of these provisions, as specified, including for a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation, as specified.

This bill would declare that a contract that violates these provisions is to that extent void and that its provisions do not limit the applicability of antitrust laws.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Aisha WahabPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate10

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

  1. August 29 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
  2. August 20 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
  3. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
  4. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 4.) (July 16).
  5. Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 49. Noes 15. Page 2578.)
  6. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. (Ayes 9. Noes 2.) (July 1). Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
  7. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
  8. Referred to Coms. on JUD. and P. & C.P.
  9. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
  10. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 10. Page 1469.) Ordered to the Assembly.
  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
  12. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 1198.) (May 23).

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page