California SB 1247 lets grown kids of family vloggers force video takedowns
The law covers adults who appeared in 30% or more of a relative's paid content, and ignoring a request can cost the vlogger $3,000 a day.
The tea in 3
- Adults featured as minors in a relative's monetized content can demand removal under California's SB 1247, effective Jan. 1, 2027.
- The kid must appear in 30% of the vlogger's content, and the vlogger gets 10 business days (per Nixon Peabody) to delete or edit.
- Ignoring a request can cost $3,000 per day plus damages and fees, and platforms must provide a request mechanism.
California’s SB 1247 is now law, and it lets adults who were featured in family vlogs as kids demand that the videos come down. Tubefilter calls it a new California law, and the law firm Nixon Peabody says it takes effect Jan. 1, 2027 and adds new sections to the state Family Code.
It only covers paid content, which is why family channels are paying attention.
Who can use it
A “child influencer” is someone who is now at least 18 and was featured as a minor in monetized content by a parent, guardian or other family member. That relative counts as a “vlogger” under the law if they were paid for sharing it.
The minor has to have appeared in at least 30% of the vlogger’s content, according to Tubefilter and Nixon Peabody. Tubefilter says qualifying income includes ad revenue, brand deals, tips and merch tied to the creator’s social presence. A classmate or party guest who shows up in the background isn’t covered.
How a takedown works
- The adult sends a request to delete the content or edit them out
- The family member has 10 business days, per Nixon Peabody, to do it
- If the video stays up, the penalties start
Comply, and Tubefilter says there are no consequences. Don’t, and the vlogger can face $3,000 for each day of violation, plus actual damages, an injunction and attorneys’ fees, according to Nixon Peabody.
Tubefilter reports the law is retroactive, so it can reach videos posted before 2027.
What platforms have to do
Platforms such as YouTube, TikTok and Instagram must offer a “clear and conspicuous mechanism” for these requests, per both sources. If a request can’t go straight to the vlogger, the platform has to pass it along within three days (Tubefilter) or three business days (Nixon Peabody).
Nixon Peabody notes the law has no minimum earnings test. Its related law, SB 764, includes a $1,250-per-month earnings condition. Under SB 1247, a family that earned any money from videos featuring the kid and hit the 30% mark could be covered.
What’s still unclear
Tubefilter notes the text doesn’t say what happens when a parent hires an outside vlogger to feature their child regularly. Neither source says how the 30% figure will be measured in practice.
Where it stands
The law takes effect Jan. 1, 2027, per Nixon Peabody. Until then, family channels have a few months to figure out which of their videos could draw a request. Tubefilter expects other states may look at similar protections, though that is its own forecast.
Poll
Should family vloggers have to take videos down on request?
Your reaction?
Receipts
Where this story comes from. We link primary posts and the outlets that reported them.
Something wrong or missing? Send a correction · How we report
