LB504 adopts the Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, a consumer protection law aimed at online services that are likely to be used by children or minors. The bill defines a broad set of covered online services and covered design features, including infinite scroll, rewards for time spent, notifications, in-game purchases, appearance-altering filters, targeted advertising, profiling, and precise geolocation tracking. It requires covered services to build in privacy- and safety-oriented defaults and tools, such as limiting communication with minors, restricting access to personal data, allowing minors to opt out of unnecessary design features, limiting notifications during certain hours, and providing parents with controls and monitoring tools when the service knows a user is a child.
The bill also imposes data-minimization and retention limits, bars targeted advertising to covered minors, restricts the use of dark patterns, and requires notice when precise geolocation is collected or used. It creates exceptions for certain government entities and for data governed by other federal or state privacy regimes, and it states that the act does not displace other laws that provide greater protection to minors. Violations are treated as deceptive trade practices under Nebraska law, and the Attorney General may seek civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation beginning July 1, 2026.
LB504’s impact on state law is significant because it adds a new statutory framework regulating how large online platforms and similar services design products for children and minors. It expands Nebraska consumer protection law into online safety, privacy, and product design, and it creates compliance obligations for covered companies that collect or process minors’ data, use recommendation systems, or monetize engagement through ads or purchases. The bill also authorizes enforcement through civil penalties and requires companies to designate responsible officers for compliance.
The general sentiment around the bill appears strongly favorable. The measure advanced with broad support at multiple stages, including unanimous or near-unanimous votes on several amendments and final passage by a wide margin of 42-7. The governor approved the bill, indicating executive support as well. The voting history suggests the Legislature largely agreed on the need for stronger protections for children online.
The main points of contention centered on how far the state should go in regulating online services and the scope of the obligations imposed on platforms. The failed motions and amendments indicate some lawmakers sought to alter or narrow the bill, likely around compliance burdens, enforcement, or the breadth of the covered-service definition. Even so, the final version retained extensive requirements on design features, advertising, profiling, and parental controls, reflecting a policy choice to prioritize minor safety and privacy over platform flexibility.
LB504 creates a new chapter of Nebraska consumer-protection law regulating online services that know or are likely to be used by minors. It imposes affirmative duties on covered online services to provide safety settings, parental tools, data-minimization practices, restrictions on targeted advertising and dark patterns, and limits on notifications, profiling, and geolocation use. It also makes violations deceptive trade practices and authorizes civil penalties enforced by the Attorney General, thereby expanding the state’s enforcement authority over digital platforms and data practices affecting children.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported throughout the legislative process. It passed with strong margins, including unanimous or near-unanimous votes on amendments and a 42-7 final passage vote, and it was ultimately approved by the Governor. The voting pattern suggests a general consensus that children and minors need stronger online privacy and safety protections, even if some members had reservations about the bill’s scope or regulatory burden.
The principal disagreements appear to have involved the breadth of the regulation and the extent of obligations placed on online services. Failed motions and amendments indicate that some lawmakers attempted to change the bill, likely to narrow its reach, adjust enforcement, or reduce compliance burdens for platforms. The bill’s expansive definitions of covered services, minors’ protections, and prohibited design practices likely raised concerns among opponents about overregulation, technical feasibility, and the impact on businesses, while supporters emphasized consumer protection and child safety.