Texas Will Remove Private Right of Action From App Store Bill

That and other bill language updates should help the measure move through the Texas Legislature, she said. Minors shouldn’t be allowed to enter into contractual data-sharing agreements with social media apps without parental consent, just as they’re forbidden from signing contracts for other products, she argued during a public hearing.

Tech industry representatives said the legislation, if passed, will be struck down by federal courts, like similar measures in California, Utah, Ohio, Arkansas and Mississippi. A federal judge on Wednesday permanently enjoined Ohio’s age-verification law.

HB-4901 requires parental approval for minors to download an app or make in-app purchases and sets clear age-verification standards. Fairly said she made clear before the hearing that the private right of action would be removed, and she was disappointed by testimony focused on that from ACT | The App Association and TechNet. NetChoice and Chamber of Progress also testified against the bill Tuesday.

Tech groups argued the bill violates free speech rights and exposes Texans to the risk of mass data breaches. James Madison Institute policy analyst Turner Loesel noted how hackers stole sensitive data from more than a million Australian users after Australia passed an age-verification law at the national level. Protecting children shouldn’t come at the cost of privacy and free speech, he said.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio blocked Ohio’s age-verification law on First Amendment grounds. “In this constitutional democracy, it cannot be gainsaid that even the government’s most noble entreaties to protect its citizenry must abide in the contours of the U.S. Constitution, in this case the First Amendment,” said Judge Algenon Marbley.

Rep. Shelley Luther (R) said data privacy isn’t a significant concern with this bill given users, adults and minors, already share private information with app stores when downloading digital payments apps. She argued anyone could probably find Loesel’s home address online without having age-verification laws in place. Loesel agreed but said consumers shouldn’t have to share more personal information than necessary.

The new law would force apps to write software establishing data storage and compliance programs, said ACT President Morgan Reed. Chamber of Progress State and Local Government Relations Director-Central Region Kouri Marshall called the age-verification requirements a “tremendous encroachment of individual privacy.” It will absolve many companies from the shared responsibility of verifying age while placing the entire burden on a few app stores, he said.

Chair Angie Chen Button (R) credited Fairly for taking on such “heavy lifting” in introducing a major bill as a freshman lawmaker. The bill is expected to get a vote at a later date.

Marshall cited a March 13 decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granting a full injunction against a California age restriction law. Judge Beth Freeman found California has a “compelling interest in protecting the privacy and well-being of children,” but the law fails strict scrutiny under the First Amendment: “Every covered business will be forced to choose between intruding into user privacy, thereby chilling publication of and access to protected speech, or publishing only child-appropriate content, thereby restricting access to protected speech for users of all ages.”