Social Media Platforms - Vloggers and Video Content Featuring Minors (Child Influencers Protection Act)
HB21, the Child Influencers Protection Act, creates a new set of rules for vloggers who earn money from video content posted on social media platforms when that content features a child. If a vlogger qualifies for platform-based compensation or earns at least 10 cents per view, and a child appears in at least 30% of the content posted in a 30-day period, the vlogger must compensate the child. The bill defines “child,” “feature,” and “vlogger,” and applies to both individual creators and business entities.
The bill requires compensation to be placed into separate trusts for each child, with the trust funds held until the child turns 18. It also gives adults who were featured as children in qualifying vlogger content, on or after October 1, 2026, the right to request permanent deletion of that content. Social media platforms receiving such a request must take reasonable steps to permanently delete the content, and contracts between vloggers and platforms must notify creators of these rights.
HB21 also amends Maryland’s child labor law to ensure that minors compensated under this new vlogger provision are not excluded from existing labor protections. Specifically, it revises an exception in the Labor and Employment Article so that work performed by a minor in a parent-owned or parent-operated business does not fall within the exception if the minor is required to be compensated as a child featured by a vlogger. The bill takes effect October 1, 2026.
The bill’s impact is to add a new regulatory framework in the Business Regulation Article for monetized family or child-centered social media content, while also adjusting the state’s minor labor rules to account for this new category of compensated work. It would create enforceable financial obligations for content creators, impose notice and deletion duties on platforms, and establish trust-based protections for children whose likeness or narrative is used for monetized content.
There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal sentiment is documented. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears protective of minors’ earnings and privacy, while potentially imposing new compliance burdens on vloggers and social media platforms. The main point of tension is likely the balance between child protection, creator compensation, and platform responsibility, especially for family vloggers and business entities that monetize children’s appearances.
HB21 adds a new subtitle to the Business Regulation Article governing social media vloggers and monetized video content featuring minors, and it amends the Labor and Employment Article to carve out an exception for minors who must be compensated under the new law. It would require qualifying vloggers to place a child’s share of gross earnings into a trust until age 18, authorize deletion requests by adults featured as children, and require platforms and contracts to provide notice of those rights. The bill therefore creates new duties for creators and platforms and expands statutory protections for child influencers and former child subjects of online content.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to summarize. From the bill text, the measure is framed as a child-protection and earnings-preservation bill, suggesting support from those concerned with minors’ privacy and financial interests. At the same time, it likely raises concerns among content creators and platforms about administrative burden, enforcement, and the scope of liability.
The likely points of contention are whether the bill goes far enough to protect children in monetized online content and whether it goes too far in regulating family vloggers and social media businesses. Supporters would likely emphasize compensation, trust protections, and the right to delete childhood content; critics may focus on the 30% content threshold, how earnings are calculated, the practical burden on platforms to delete content, and the effect on parent-run businesses and creator monetization. Because no hearing record is included, the specific positions of legislators or witnesses are not documented.