CAADCA Section 1798.99.31(a)(3)(A) - Data Collection Limitations
Businesses must not collect, sell, share, or retain children's personal information beyond what is necessary to provide the service unless a compelling child-welfare reason exists
Where this comes from
Provision: Section 1798.99.31(a)(3)(A) - Data Collection Limitations
Instrument: California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AB 2273)
Citation: Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.99.31(a)(3)(A), California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AB 2273)
Text version: California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, AB-2273 (2022); Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1798.99.28–1798.99.40
Who it applies to
Child audience (designed for OR likely accessed by children) — any one of these:
- Service is specifically designed for children under 18
- Service is likely to be accessed by children under 18
Remaining applicability scope — all of these:
- Service processes personal data
What engineering work it implies
Sample acceptance criteria Landfall generates for this obligation:
- Data sharing is OFF by default for all users
- Third-party integrations cannot access user data without explicit toggle
- Admin approval workflow for any bulk data export
- Data sharing settings visible in user privacy dashboard
- API blocks external data requests unless sharing is enabled
Questions people ask
- Does CAADCA Section 1798.99.31(a)(3)(A) - Data Collection Limitations apply to my service?
- It applies when at least one of: Service is specifically designed for children under 18; Service is likely to be accessed by children under 18; and Service processes personal data.
- From when does this apply?
- CAADCA Section 1798.99.31(a)(3)(A) - Data Collection Limitations applies from 1 July 2024. Its current status is: in force.
Find out whether this one lands on you
Landfall's pre-scan answers the applicability question above for your product in minutes, then turns every obligation that applies into traceable engineering tickets with a citation chain your auditors can follow.
Not legal advice. Landfall maps regulatory obligations to engineering work for planning purposes. Its verdicts are not legal advice and create no attorney-client relationship — verify with qualified counsel before relying on them.