Binding law — in force AI-adjacent law
Automated push and marketing must offer an option not based on personal characteristics, or an easy way to refuse (China PIPL)
Where a personal information handler pushes information or markets to individuals by automated decision-making, it must at the same time offer an option that is not targeted at the individual's personal characteristics, or give the individual a convenient way to refuse (Art. 24(2)). Automated decision-making means computer programs automatically analysing and assessing a person's behaviour, interests or economic, health or credit status and deciding (Art. 73(2)). Detect personalised feed, push or marketing calls with no non-personalised option or refusal.
Trust and provenance not reviewed by a lawyer · audit-grade · source verified 3 Oct 2026 · release 2026.10.03.3
- Lane
- Binding law — in force In force: applies since 1 Nov 2021
- Official source
- 中华人民共和国个人信息保护法 第二十四条第二款 (Art. 24(2), non-personalised option or refusal for automated push and marketing) · captured 2 Oct 2026 · anchor hash (SHA-256)
b733e24e8f89…· 6 more anchors in the data release - Verification
- Quoted text found word for word in the captured official document (3 Oct 2026). Source last verified 3 Oct 2026: checked against the captured official document; not in the weekly watcher's list; checked against the captured document.
- Data release
- Data release 2026.10.03.3, data as of 3 Oct 2026, schema 0.3.9.
- Legal review
- Not reviewed by a lawyer. TwinEthos derived this rule from the official text it cites: treat it as research to check against that text; it is not legal advice. No TwinEthos rule has been legally reviewed yet.
- Audit standard
- Audit-grade: meets all 10 checks of the TwinEthos audit standard that apply to it. The audit standard is TwinEthos's own quality bar for provenance, dates, applicability, detectors, fixtures, remediation and licences; it is not a legal review.
- Detectors
1 detector (code pattern), experimental: written from the rule's text and not yet measured for precision on real code, so treat a hit as a lead to verify.
Known limits:
- Opt-out enforced by a feature-flag service
- User-tag management UI
- The toggle may be read in a controller that wraps the recommender; confirm the request path. Tag select/delete controls (Art. 17 para. 2) are checked by the artifact detector.
Who it applies to
- Duty falls on: controller
- Systems covered: automated decision
- Personal information handlers that use personal information for automated decision-making (computer programs automatically analysing or assessing a person's behaviour, interests, or economic, health or credit status and making decisions, Art. 73(2)), in China and abroad where Art. 3(2) applies. In force 2021-11-01 (Art. 74). AI-adjacent (D-9, D-13).
- Not covered:
- Natural persons processing personal information for personal or family affairs (Art. 72(1))
- Personal information processing in statistical and archival work organised by governments and their departments, where a law provides for it (Art. 72(2))
The guard to add
Give users a setting that turns off personalized recommendation (or picks a non-personalized feed) and controls to view and delete their targeting tags, enforced in the feed service.
A per-user personalization_enabled preference stored server-side and read by the feed or search service before it calls the personalized recommender (get_recommendations, recommend_for_user); when it is off, the service immediately serves a non-personalized feed (latest, popular, editorial) not keyed to user features, including on cached responses. The interest tags or labels that drive targeting are listed to the user with select and delete controls (GET and DELETE /me/tags/{id}), and the recommender excludes deleted tags on the next request. A notice in settings or next to the feed says that recommendations are algorithmic and why.
Where it goes: 1 application source code, 2 data models, 9 AI output handling, 14 user-facing text.
What this provision adds:
- Offer, alongside personalised push and marketing, an option not targeted at personal characteristics, or a convenient refusal that the push and marketing service reads before calling the personalised model.
Example (FastAPI feed service), before:
@app.get('/feed')
def feed(user=Depends(current_user)):
return get_recommendations(user_id=user.id, k=50)After:
@app.get('/feed')
def feed(user=Depends(current_user)):
if not prefs.get(user.id, 'personalization_enabled', default=True):
return non_personalized_feed(k=50) # latest/popular, no user features
return get_recommendations(user_id=user.id, k=50, exclude_tags=tags.deleted(user.id))
@app.delete('/me/tags/{tag_id}')
def delete_tag(tag_id: str, user=Depends(current_user)):
tags.delete(user.id, tag_id)
feed_cache.invalidate(user.id)Control: Algorithmic recommendation with no opt-out or non-personalized option. The same guard addresses 2 items with binding law in 1 jurisdiction. Engineering guidance, not legal advice.
Related incidents
No guardrail sits on this exact control; these incidents are cited by guardrails on related controls.
- Meta says it will use people's interactions with Meta AI to personalize content and ads (2025-10; disclosed by the operator). On October 1, 2025 Meta announced that from December 16, 2025, in most regions, it would use people's interactions with AI at Meta to personalize the content and ads they see, with notifications to users starting October 7, 2025. Meta says that when people have conversations with Meta AI about topics such as their religious views, sexual orientation, political views, health, racial or ethnic origin, philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, it does not use those topics to show them ads, and it points people to Ads Preferences and feed controls to adjust what they see. The entry records the operator's own description of its practice. Source: Meta Newsroom (2025-10-01) · evidence grade: primary · cited by Do not profile people from AI-inferred emotions or sensitive traits without notice and opt-in
- Microsoft retires Azure Face emotion and identity-attribute inference (2022-06; disclosed by the operator). On June 21, 2022 Microsoft said it would retire Azure Face capabilities that infer emotional states and identity attributes such as gender, age, smile, facial hair, hair, and makeup: unavailable to new customers from that day, with existing customers given until June 30, 2023 to stop using them. Microsoft cited privacy, the lack of consensus on a definition of 'emotions', and the inability to generalize the link between facial expression and emotional state across use cases, regions, and demographics, and said that access to capabilities predicting sensitive attributes opens ways to misuse them, including stereotyping, discrimination, or unfair denial of services. It kept these capabilities for controlled accessibility scenarios such as Seeing AI. Source: Microsoft Azure Blog (2022-06-21) · evidence grade: primary · cited by Do not profile people from AI-inferred emotions or sensitive traits without notice and opt-in
- Hungarian regulator fines a bank for AI analysis of callers' emotions without notice or a way to object (2017-05; confirmed). In decision NAIH-85-3/2022 of 8 February 2022, Hungary's data protection authority found that Budapest Bank's speech-analysis software, which the bank said it introduced on 26 May 2017, automatically analysed recorded customer-service calls for keywords and for the emotional state of the caller and the employee, and that the results were used to rank calls and to select dissatisfied customers to call back. The Authority found that callers were not told at the start of calls about the voice analysis, the automatic evaluation of their emotions, or the resulting possible callback, and could not object; it rejected the bank's statement that the software contained no artificial intelligence. It found infringements of GDPR Articles 5(1)(a)-(b), 6(1), 6(4), 12(1), 13, 21(1)-(2), 24(1) and 25(1), ordered the bank not to analyse emotions in the voice analysis, and imposed a fine of HUF 250 million. The decision also records, from the bank's own technical file, that the emotion was unrecognisable in 91.96% of cases. Source: Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság (Hungarian data protection authority), decision NAIH-85-3/2022, English version · evidence grade: primary · cited by Do not profile people from AI-inferred emotions or sensitive traits without notice and opt-in
Rule id cn-pipl-adm.push-marketing-non-personalised-option · review status: primary source derived