California Enacts Law Requiring IMDb To Remove Actor Ages On Request (hollywoodreporter.com)

California Gov. Jerry Brown on Saturday signed legislation that requires certain entertainment sites, such as IMDb, to remove -- or not post in the first place -- an actor's age or birthday upon request, reports Hollywood Reporter. From the report: The law, which becomes effective Jan. 1, 2017, applies to entertainment database sites that allow paid subscribers to post resumes, headshots or other information for prospective employers. Only a paying subscriber can make a removal or nonpublication request. Although the legislation may be most critical for actors, it applies to all entertainment job categories. "Even though it is against both federal and state law, age discrimination persists in the entertainment industry," Majority Leader Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, said in a statement. "AB 1687 provides the necessary tools to remove age information from online profiles on employment referral websites to help prevent this type of discrimination."Bloomberg columnist, Shira Ovide said, "Congratulations, IMDB. You have now become the subject of California law." Slate writer Will Oremus added, "Sometimes I start to think California is not such a bad place and then they go and do something like this."

Comments

Only IMDB?

[Hartree]

So, we'll have it that Wikipedia can post age data about an actor or some other public figure, but IMDB can't?

Odd

[Archfeld]

I was under the impression that Birth, Death, and marriage information was publically available in California.

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic...

It would seem that this law is in violation of the existing laws, but IANAL, nor am I a rich 'celebrity'. Hollywood folks seem generally above most laws, or at least shielded from them.

Re:Yup

[Anonymous Coward]

Loser pays his own costs, and his opponent's costs up to a cap equal to his own costs?

Re:Yup

[amicusNYCL]

Recently in Wisconsin, our Republican Gov and Legislature had to reimburse Planned Parenthood over a million dollars for legal expenses when the latest anti-abortion law was thrown out.

Luxury! Here in Arizona we have a sheriff who openly violates court rulings, gets hit with contempt of court, and our lawmakers still approve $50 million or so of taxpayer money to fight his legal battles.