Their website is actually really good and well worth a read. It is both funny and poignant.

To quote their “why”:

Q: What is the point of all this? There are two points.

The first is that AB 1043’s definitions are so broad that a bash script and a static website can create a regulated operating system. A law that cannot distinguish between Apple Inc. and a shell script has a drafting problem. A law that sweeps in 600+ volunteer Linux distributions was not written with them in mind. A law that was not written with them in mind but regulates them anyway is not a careful law.

The second is that this law was never meant to be enforced against everyone it covers. It was meant to be enforced selectively. The large platform companies already comply. The small ones can’t. The Attorney General has sole enforcement discretion. A law that gives a single office the power to selectively impose $7,500-per-child fines against any operating system distributor in the state — while ensuring that only the largest corporations can avoid liability — is not a child safety measure. It is a tool for selective prosecution. The children are the justification. The discretion is the product.

We are trying to make the selective part difficult. If the AG wants to enforce AB 1043, we would like to be first in line. We are a clear violation. We are documented. We are findable. We are daring them. If the law is worth enforcing, enforce it against us. If it is not worth enforcing against us, ask why it exists.