California's AB 723: altered real estate photos need a disclosure and a link to the original
California's AB 723 added section 10140.8 to the Business and Professions Code, effective January 1, 2026. When a real estate broker or salesperson, or someone acting for them, uses a digitally altered image in an ad for the sale of property, the ad must say so and link to the original. This is information, not legal advice.
What does California AB 723 require?
We read the chaptered text of AB 723 on November 2, 2026. Subsection (a) of section 10140.8 sets two duties, in paragraphs (1) and (2). The first has two parts.
- A statement and a link. The ad or promotional material must carry a statement that the image has been altered. It must also carry a link to a publicly accessible website, URL or QR code that includes and clearly identifies the original, unaltered image.
- Where the statement goes. It must be reasonably conspicuous and sit on or next to the image. It must say that the unaltered images can be reached at the link, URL or QR code. The text we read gives no fixed wording.
- The original on the page itself. If the ad is posted on a website the broker, salesperson or person acting for them controls, the posting must include the unaltered versions of the images the altered ones were made from. A link to a publicly accessible page that shows the originals can meet this duty, and the statement must then say where to find them.
Who does the law apply to?
The text names a real estate broker or salesperson, or a person acting on their behalf. It covers advertisements and other promotional material for the sale of real property. It does not mention rentals. The definition of an altered image covers an image created by or at the direction of that person. Whether a given situation is covered is a question for a lawyer.
What counts as a digitally altered image, and what does not?
The definition is in subsection (b). An image is altered when photo editing software or artificial intelligence has been used to add, remove or change elements in it. The statute's own examples are listed below.
| Covered or not | What the text lists |
|---|---|
| Inside the property | Fixtures, furniture, appliances, flooring, walls and paint color |
| Outside and around it | Hardscape, landscape and facade |
| Plans | Floor plans |
| Elements outside of, or visible from, the property | Streetlights, utility poles, views through windows and neighboring properties |
| Not covered | Images where only lighting, sharpening, white balance, color correction, angle, straightening, cropping, exposure or other common adjustments were made, so long as they do not change the representation of the real property |
The text introduces its list of elements as including, but not limited to, those named, so they are examples, not a closed list. Furniture is on the list.
When did it take effect, and what is the penalty?
The bill status page shows that the Governor approved AB 723 and the Secretary of State chaptered it on October 10, 2025, as Chapter 497, Statutes of 2025. It was a non-urgency bill. The code page for section 10140.8 says "Effective January 1, 2026".
The bill's digest says the new duties are requirements on real estate licensees, and that a violation of them is a crime. Section 10140.8 has no penalty clause of its own. It sits in Division 4 of the Business and Professions Code, the Real Estate Law. Section 10185 makes a willful violation of that division, or knowing participation in one, a misdemeanor. It sets a fine of up to $10,000, jail of up to six months, or both. We did not read the rest of the Real Estate Law, so we do not say what other consequences may follow.
Can a file show whether a listing photo was altered?
Sometimes. A signed Content Credentials record can show that a file changed after it was signed, and many files carry no record at all. The text of AB 723 that we read does not mention metadata or Content Credentials. The duty it sets is a statement and a link in the ad. The checker cannot tell you whether a disclosure was required.
Here is what our own tests show. They are results about our checker and the files we hold, not advice.
| What we did | Files | What the checker read |
|---|---|---|
| Changed 12 bytes of image data after signing | 1 signed Adobe Firefly sample | "Content Credentials failed validation" |
| Drew the file on a canvas and saved it again as PNG, then as JPEG | 9 real files with a record | 0 of 9 kept the record, as PNG or as JPEG; all 18 outputs read "No supported provenance signals found" |
So a signed record can show that pixels changed after signing. A re-save can remove the record entirely, and then the file says nothing about its history. A canvas is not a platform. We contacted no platform, used one browser and one JPEG quality, and tested no listing site. The guide on checking whether a photo has been edited shows the changed-bytes test, and the guide on screenshots shows the re-save test. Our accuracy page lists the changed-bytes file, and its re-render section has the re-save counts.
What this means when you check an image
Open the checker, choose the file, and read the headline. Two are relevant to a listing photo.
If you see "Content Credentials failed validation", the file carries a record that did not pass the check. In our changed-bytes test, the cause was image data we had changed after signing. The headline does not say who changed the image, what changed, or whether the change is one that AB 723 covers.
If you see "No supported provenance signals found", the checker found none of the signals it reads. That does not show the photo is unedited. As our re-save test shows, a re-save can drop a record, and many images never carried one. The checker also shows this line with every result: "These checks cannot determine whether an image is AI-generated."
For the law itself, look at the ad. The statute asks for a statement on or next to the image and a link to the original. If you work in real estate and are unsure whether a change counts, ask a lawyer or your brokerage.
Guides on this topic
- Visible AI watermarks is the main page on labels you can see on an image.
- California's AI Transparency Act covers the separate California law on hidden disclosures in AI images.
- Is this product photo AI? covers checking listing and marketplace images.
- How to check whether a photo has been edited shows what signed records and re-saves do.
- Does a screenshot keep metadata or Content Credentials? shows what a re-save leaves behind.
Frequently asked questions
- Does AB 723 say what the statement must say?
- It sets no fixed wording in the text we read. The statement must say the image has been altered, be reasonably conspicuous, sit on or next to the image, and say that the unaltered images can be reached at the link, URL or QR code.
- Does touching up the lighting or cropping a photo count as altering it?
- The statute excludes lighting, sharpening, white balance, color correction, angle, straightening, cropping and exposure, along with other common adjustments, when they do not change the representation of the real property.
- Does the law apply to rental listings?
- The text we read speaks of advertisements and promotional material for the sale of real property. It does not mention rentals. Ask a lawyer about a specific case.
- Can the New Watermark checker tell me if a listing photo needs a disclosure?
- No. Its headlines say which supported signals it found in a file. It cannot say what was changed in a photo or whether the law applies to it.