Proposing An Amendment To The Hawaii State Constitution Establishing The Right To Own One's Own Data.
Summary
SB170 proposes a constitutional amendment to add a new right in Article I of the Hawaii State Constitution: each person would own, and have an exclusive property right in, the data they generate on a public networked information system such as the Internet. The measure frames this as a personal data ownership and internet privacy protection, and it would place the proposed amendment before voters on the ballot if approved through the constitutional amendment process.
The bill also directs the Legislature to determine which categories of data would be covered and how the right would be implemented and enforced. In other words, SB170 does not itself create a detailed regulatory scheme; instead, it would establish a constitutional principle and leave the scope, administration, and enforcement mechanisms to future legislative action.
Impact
If adopted, SB170 would amend the Hawaii Constitution and create a new constitutional property right in certain internet-generated data. This would affect state law by requiring the Legislature to define the covered data, set enforcement rules, and potentially reconcile the new right with existing privacy, consumer protection, intellectual property, and data-use laws. The practical impact would extend to individuals, businesses, online platforms, and any entity that collects, processes, or uses user-generated data in Hawaii.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the available record suggests a neutral-to-supportive policy framing centered on privacy, personal control, and data ownership. The measure is presented as a rights-expanding constitutional amendment rather than a regulatory restriction, and there is no documented opposition or amendment debate in the provided materials. Because no committee transcripts or voting history are included, there is no clear evidence of broader legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s stated purpose.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the breadth and ambiguity of the proposed right. The bill leaves key questions unresolved, including what counts as data a person “generates,” which data are subject to the amendment, and how an exclusive property right would interact with existing data collection, platform terms of service, and commercial uses of online information. Another likely issue is implementation: the Legislature would need to define enforcement and resolve conflicts with privacy law, digital commerce, and intellectual property interests. No specific opposing or supporting lawmakers are identified in the provided record.
A bill for an act relating to public disclosures of certain information in the child abuse registry relating to founded reports of child abuse involving sexual abuse.