WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 3712

PRIVACY PROTECTION-LOCATION

104th Regular Session Introduced by Kelly Cassidy and 2 co-sponsors

HB 3712 bars private entities from collecting location data without explicit opt-in consent and a clear privacy policy, enabling civil damages for violations.

Rule 19(a) / Re-referred to Rules Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 3712

Summary — HB 3712: Privacy Protections for Location Information Derived from Electronic Devices

Status: Introduced (02/18/2025); Rule 19(a) / Re‑referred to Rules Committee. Companion: SB 2131. Sponsors: Rep. Ann M. Williams (primary); Reps. Kelly M. Cassidy and Barbara Hernandez (cosponsors).

Purpose / Intent

Creates the "Privacy Protections for Location Information Derived from Electronic Devices Act." The stated legislative intent is to protect reproductive‑health access, safety of LGBTQ lives, religious liberty, and freedom of movement by restricting how private entities collect, process, disclose, and monetize individuals’ location information.

Key provisions

  • Makes it unlawful for a "covered entity" to collect or process an individual's location information except for enumerated "permissible purposes."
  • Requires that, before collecting or processing location information for a permissible purpose, the covered entity provide the individual a copy of the entity’s "location or device privacy policy" and obtain the individual’s prior, opt‑in consent.
    • "Consent" must be freely given, specific, informed, unambiguous, opt‑in and cannot be obtained through manipulative user interfaces or without a clear pre‑consent disclosure (separate from a generic privacy policy or terms of service).
  • Defines extensive terms: "location information" (includes IP addresses capable of revealing physical location, GPS coordinates, cell‑site location info), "device," "process," "monetize," and "location privacy policy."
    • "Reasonably understandable" is defined as language accessible to an 8th‑grade reading level.
  • Permissible purposes (non‑exclusive examples):
    • Providing a product/service or service feature requested by the individual.
    • Initiation/fulfillment of commercial transactions requested by the individual (e.g., delivery, billing, storage).
    • Compliance with federal or state law.
    • Response to emergencies or imminent threats to human life.
  • Service providers may receive location information solely to perform contracted business functions on behalf of a covered entity.

Enforcement and remedies

  • Authorizes a private civil action by any affected individual.
  • If plaintiff prevails, remedies may include:
    • Actual damages (including emotional‑distress damages) or statutory damages of $5,000 per violation, whichever is greater;
    • Punitive damages;
    • Any other appropriate relief.
  • Court must award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to prevailing plaintiffs.
  • No criminal penalties are stated in the available text.

Who is affected

  • Primary targets: private entities that collect/process location data (mobile apps, advertisers, data brokers, device manufacturers, platform operators, some retailers and delivery services).
  • Exclusions: state and local government agencies, state courts/clerk/judges, and individuals acting in a noncommercial context.
  • Recipients: third parties and service providers are limited in their permitted uses and transfers.

Procedural history (highlights)

  • Filed: 02/18/2025; First reading: 02/18/2025.
  • Referred to Rules Committee; assigned to Judiciary – Civil and Trade, Workforce & Economic Development committees at various points.
  • Committee substitute reported favorably (04/30/2025); considered in public hearings (04/15 & 04/30/2025).
  • Placed on General State Calendar: 05/15/2025. Current status: Rule 19(a) / Re‑referred to Rules Committee.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Could significantly increase compliance costs for businesses that handle location data (consent flows, privacy policies, data‑handling practices, contractual limits with service providers).
  • Exposure to statutory damages and attorney fees creates meaningful litigation risk and may encourage settlements.
  • The bill emphasizes prior, informed opt‑in consent and restricts data monetization, which could limit targeted advertising and data brokerage markets.
  • Text available is truncated in parts; some operational details, exemptions, or implementation timelines may be contained in omitted sections.

Note: Summary is based on the introduced bill text as provided; readers should consult the full bill and any committee substitutes for final language and amendments.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.