Notes

Manual dialing to non-DNC numbers: prior express consent sufficient. ADAD/robocall to any number: live introduction required before prerecorded message, plus called party must consent to hear the message (§ 2874). Recording ANY call: all-party consent required under CIPA. The combination of ADAD + CIPA means California effectively requires dual consent: (1) consent to hear the prerecorded message AND (2) consent to record the call. Calling hours for ADAD: 9 AM - 9 PM CA time. Manual calls: 8 AM - 9 PM local time (federal standard).

ATDS Definition

California does not have its own statutory ATDS definition separate from the federal TCPA. After Facebook v. Duguid (2021), the federal ATDS definition requires random or sequential number generation. However, California's ADAD statute (Pub. Util. Code § 2871) defines automatic dialing-announcing devices as equipment incorporating storage of numbers OR a random/sequential generator PLUS capability to disseminate prerecorded messages. The ADAD definition is functionally broader because it captures any device that stores numbers and delivers prerecorded messages, regardless of number generation method.

Statute

Cal. Pub. Util. Code §§ 2871-2876; Cal. Penal Code § 632

Notes

Automated SMS marketing to CA consumers requires prior express written consent under federal TCPA. The FCC one-to-one consent rule eliminates the lead generator loophole — consent must name YOUR company specifically. CCPA gives CA consumers the right to opt out of personal information sharing, which includes phone numbers on lead lists. The combination means: (1) you need specific written consent for your company before texting, (2) CA consumers can demand their data be deleted from your systems, and (3) buying lead lists without one-to-one consent is legally unusable for automated SMS.

ATDS Definition

SMS compliance in California follows federal TCPA standards post-Duguid for ATDS claims, but the CCPA/CPRA adds a data privacy layer. Any automated texting to California consumers requires prior express written consent under federal TCPA for marketing messages. The FCC one-to-one consent rule (effective January 2025) requires consent specific to each seller — purchased lead lists with bundled consent are not valid.

Statute

47 U.S.C. § 227; Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 et seq.

Notes

Highest complexity channel in California. AI voice agents trigger at least four overlapping regulatory frameworks: (1) ADAD — live intro required, consent to hear message, 9AM-9PM hours; (2) AB 2905 — must disclose AI voice at call start, $5,000/violation/day; (3) CIPA — if the call is recorded or monitored, all-party consent required, $5,000 per violation; (4) Federal TCPA — prior express written consent for marketing calls using automated systems. FTC impersonation rules add additional liability if AI voice mimics a real person without disclosure. California is the most hostile jurisdiction in the US for AI voice telemarketing deployment.

ATDS Definition

AI voice calls in California are subject to the ADAD statute (prerecorded message rules), CIPA (call recording), AB 2905 (AI disclosure), and federal TCPA. An AI voice agent that delivers automated messages using stored phone numbers falls squarely within the ADAD definition. AB 2905 adds the specific requirement to disclose AI-generated or AI-altered voices at call start.

Statute

Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 2874 (as amended by AB 2905); Cal. Penal Code § 632; 47 U.S.C. § 227

Notes

California's ADAD statute requires a live person to introduce the call, state the business name/address/phone, and ask if the person consents to hear the prerecorded message — BEFORE the prerecorded content plays. This is stricter than federal TCPA which allows prerecorded messages to play immediately with an opt-out mechanism. In California, you need affirmative consent to even begin the prerecorded portion. EBR exemption exists for calls to established customers using devices that are NOT random/sequential dialers and are used solely to transmit messages to established associates or customers.

ATDS Definition

Prerecorded message delivery via ADAD is the core regulated activity under Cal. Pub. Util. Code §§ 2871-2876. Any equipment that stores numbers and can disseminate prerecorded messages qualifies as an ADAD regardless of number generation method.

Statute

Cal. Pub. Util. Code §§ 2871-2876; 47 U.S.C. § 227

Notes

Treat RVM as requiring prior express written consent in California. While no CA appellate court has directly ruled on RVM under the ADAD statute, the broad definition of prerecorded message dissemination likely encompasses direct-to-voicemail delivery. The FCC has signaled RVM is a "call" under federal TCPA. CIPA concerns also arise if any recording/monitoring of the voicemail deposit occurs. Conservative compliance posture: written consent required, same as robocall.

ATDS Definition

RVM legal status in California is unsettled. The FCC has signaled that RVM constitutes a "call" under TCPA. California courts have not issued definitive guidance, but the ADAD statute's broad definition of disseminating prerecorded messages likely captures RVM as a method of delivering prerecorded content to a telephone.

Statute

Cal. Pub. Util. Code §§ 2871-2876; 47 U.S.C. § 227

Notes

Same consent requirements as SMS. Prior express written consent required for automated MMS marketing. FCC one-to-one consent rule applies. CCPA opt-out rights apply to consumer data used for MMS campaigns. No distinction between SMS and MMS for compliance purposes in California.

ATDS Definition

MMS treated identically to SMS under federal TCPA for consent purposes. No separate California statute addresses MMS distinctly from SMS.

Statute

47 U.S.C. § 227; Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 et seq.

Notes

Unsolicited fax advertising prohibited under both federal and CA law. Prior express consent required. EBR exemption available under JFPA for existing business relationships with opt-out notice on each fax. California UCL provides additional enforcement mechanism for unlawful fax advertising.

ATDS Definition

Fax solicitations governed primarily by federal TCPA and Junk Fax Prevention Act (JFPA). California consumer protection statutes also prohibit unsolicited commercial fax advertising.

Statute

47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C); Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200