Provides relative to minors' use of applications (EN SEE FISC NOTE SG RV)
HB 570 creates a new set of Louisiana laws governing minors’ use of applications downloaded through covered application stores. It requires app store providers to request age information, verify a user’s age category through commercially available methods, and, if the user is a minor, link the account to a parent account and obtain verifiable parental consent before allowing downloads, purchases, or in-app purchases. The bill also requires notice and renewed consent when an application undergoes a significant change, and it sets out detailed definitions for age categories, parent accounts, minor accounts, age ratings, content descriptions, and related terms.
The bill also imposes parallel obligations on developers. Developers must use age-category data shared by app stores, obtain or confirm parental consent for minors, notify app stores of significant changes, enforce age-related restrictions, and implement developer-created safety features. Both app stores and developers are restricted from misrepresenting consent disclosures or sharing age-verification data beyond what the law allows. The bill includes protections for developers who comply in good faith, preserves other legal remedies, and exempts certain emergency-service applications from parental-consent requirements.
HB 570 amends existing law on children’s internet data protections and adds Part II to Title 51, Chapter 20-A, creating a new statutory framework for app-store age verification and parental consent in Louisiana. It affects covered application store providers, app developers, parents, and minors by regulating account creation, data sharing, consent procedures, and enforcement practices. The attorney general is given civil enforcement authority, with fines of up to $10,000 per violation and additional penalties for noncompliance with orders, while collected penalties are directed to consumer protection efforts. The act becomes effective July 1, 2026.
The bill appears to have broad legislative support and ultimately passed overwhelmingly in both chambers. Final passage votes were unanimous or near-unanimous, and the conference report was adopted with strong support in both the House and Senate. The only notable recorded opposition was to an earlier House amendment, which failed decisively, suggesting that while the overall policy was broadly accepted, some members objected to specific changes during the amendment process.
The main points of contention likely centered on the scope and mechanics of age verification, parental consent, and data sharing requirements for app stores and developers. The bill’s detailed compliance obligations, use of commercially available age-verification methods, and limits on sharing age-verification data could raise concerns about privacy, implementation burden, and technical feasibility for platform operators. The failed House amendment vote indicates at least some disagreement over how the bill should be structured, though the final enacted version drew little recorded opposition. Emergency-service exemptions and protections for lawful security, spam filtering, and criminal-prevention measures appear designed to address concerns about overbreadth.