Smartphones sold in California will now require a "kill switch" which will render the phones useless in the event of a loss or theft.
The bill was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on Monday in an effort to reduce phone theft in California.
"Our efforts will effectively wipe out the incentive to steal smartphones and curb this crime of convenience, which is fueling street crime and violence within our communities," said Senator Mark Leno, the author of the bill.
Essentially what this law means is that starting in 2015, every smartphone sold in California will come with technology allowing the owner to remotely lock and shut down their phone in the event of it being stolen or lost.
A similar bill was introduced in Minnesota in May, however in Minnesota the kill switch is an opt-in option rather than a default setting. According to Leno, if the bill in California was passed it would be much more strict.
"Opt-in does not end the problem. Because it will not be ubiquitous," said Leno to the Senate in April.
Policymakers have been working toward the kill switch standard for a while, arguing that if smartphones were instantly blocked when they were stolen, theft would decrease significantly.
This move comes after smartphone thefts hit an all time high in San Francisco in 2013. Thefts reached 23 percent, with a grand total of 2,400. In total, around 3 million Americans reported having their phones stolen last year alone. That's double the rate in 2012.
Despite most people considering the bill a good move, some are concerned that it actually may not have an effect on theft. If a hacker were to figure out how to block a phone from its own user or how to unblock the phone, then they could still steal the phone with no real repercussions as far as device hardware goes.
While the wireless industry was initially opposed to the bill, that opposition was changed after Leno agreed to postpone the date that smartphones had to have this feature until July 1, 2015.
This is not the first time that a bill of this nature has been proposed. In April the CTIA Wireless Association proposed a similar bill. This proposal, however, was criticized for doing more to help the companies in the wireless industry rather than the consumers themselves.
