HB 3936
Prohibits any hardware, software or service that uses artificial intelligence from being installed or downloaded onto or used or accessed by state information technology assets if the artificial intelligence is developed or owned by a covered vendor.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
67%
Oppose
33%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill prohibits the use of artificial intelligence developed or owned by certain foreign companies on Oregon’s state government technology assets. Specifically, it restricts the installation and use of hardware, software, and services that utilize AI from companies like Ant Group, ByteDance, Huawei, Kaspersky, Tencent, and ZTE. The bill also defines ‘covered products’ and ‘covered vendors’ and provides exceptions for investigatory or enforcement purposes.
Key provisions
- Prohibits the use of AI developed or owned by designated ‘covered vendors’ on state information technology assets.
- Identifies specific ‘covered vendors’ including several major technology companies.
- Defines ‘covered product’ as hardware, software, or services using AI developed by a foreign corporate entity.
- Specifies which state agencies (Secretary of State and State Treasurer’s offices) are covered.
- Allows for exceptions for investigatory, regulatory, or law enforcement purposes.
- Establishes a process for the State Chief Information Officer to designate additional ‘covered vendors’.
Who is affected
- Oregon State Government Agencies (Secretary of State, State Treasurer’s Office)
- Contractors working with state agencies
- Technology vendors (specifically those identified as ‘covered vendors’)
- Individuals and organizations utilizing state IT assets
Notable changes
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Cosponsor
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of the legislation argue that it will enhance the state's data management capabilities and technological infrastructure, ultimately benefiting the public. They emphasize the need for improved systems to ensure efficient and secure data handling, which is critical for various government functions and services. While some individuals may have concerns about specific aspects of the proposal, many supporters see the legislation as a necessary step towards modernizing the state's technology landscape and improving overall service delivery.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
The opposition to HB 3936 is centered around concerns that the proposed legislation's focus on domestic AI development is insufficient, as it fails to consider the broader global implications of AI ownership and development. that a more comprehensive approach, incorporating international cooperation and governance, is necessary to address the societal and economic impacts of AI on a global scale. They contend that solely focusing on domestic regulation may lead to a "patchwork" of laws, creating regulatory inconsistencies and loopholes that could be exploited by foreign entities.
Source: Testimony Summaries