To amend sections 3313.60, 3314.03, 3326.11, and 3328.24 and to enact sections 109.44, 1349.07, 1349.071, 1349.072, 1349.073, 1349.074, 1349.075, 3301.0733, 3313.6034, and 5502.523 of the Revised Code to require the Attorney General to establish a statewide camera footage registry system, to impose various requirements on gaming platform providers and developers, to require public schools to provide grooming awareness and prevention instruction, and to name the act Hailey's Law.
SB 379, titled Hailey’s Law, is a multi-part bill that would create several new state programs and regulatory requirements. First, it directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a statewide camera footage registry system where private individuals may voluntarily submit footage that may depict a crime, and law enforcement agencies may request access to that footage. The bill also requires the Attorney General to adopt rules to implement the registry and to issue digital crime enforcement parameters to help law enforcement obtain warrants for digitally stored information.
The bill also creates a new framework regulating gaming platform providers and video game developers when minors use gaming services in Ohio. It defines age categories and requires platforms to verify users’ age category, affiliate minor accounts with parent accounts, obtain verifiable parental consent before minors download, purchase, or make in-game purchases, notify parents and users of significant game changes, protect age-verification data, and limit sharing of that data. Developers would have parallel duties to verify age and consent through platform data, notify platforms of significant changes, and avoid misrepresenting parental-consent disclosures. The bill creates private causes of action for minors or parents harmed by violations and treats certain misrepresentations as unfair or deceptive practices.
In the education area, SB 379 requires public schools, community schools, STEM schools, and college-preparatory boarding schools to provide annual, developmentally appropriate grooming awareness and prevention instruction. The instruction must cover recognizing grooming behaviors, manipulation, boundary testing, online warning signs, how to respond and preserve evidence, and how to seek help from a trusted adult. The Department of Education and Workforce would be required to compile and update a list of curricula and materials schools may use for this instruction. Parents must be notified in advance, and students may be excused upon written request.
The bill also creates a statewide emergency pink alert program for missing individuals when credible risk factors suggest immediate danger of serious harm or death, including evidence of online grooming, trafficking, coercive digital communication, or domestic violence. The program would coordinate among state agencies, law enforcement, and broadcasters, and the Department of Public Safety would issue annual public reports on activations and outcomes. The bill amends community school, STEM school, and boarding school compliance statutes to incorporate the new grooming instruction requirement.
Overall, the bill appears to be framed as a child-safety and anti-exploitation measure, with a strong emphasis on online grooming, digital privacy, and law-enforcement access to evidence. No committee testimony or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented vote history or formal hearing sentiment in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, likely points of contention include the scope of age verification and parental-consent mandates for gaming platforms, privacy and data-sharing concerns, the burden on developers and schools, and whether the new alert system and registry are sufficiently defined and limited.
SB 379 would add new sections to the Revised Code creating a statewide camera footage registry, a detailed regulatory regime for gaming platforms and video game developers, a grooming-awareness curriculum requirement for public schools and certain charter-like schools, and a statewide emergency pink alert program. It would also amend existing school curriculum and school-operations statutes to incorporate the new instruction requirement and compliance obligations. The bill would affect the Attorney General, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Education and Workforce, law enforcement agencies, schools, gaming platform providers, developers, minors, and parents/guardians.
The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest a generally protective, child-safety-oriented intent, with emphasis on preventing grooming, exploitation, and crime and on giving parents more control over minors’ gaming activity. Because no committee transcripts or votes were provided, there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from legislators or witnesses. From the text alone, the bill appears likely to draw support from advocates of child protection and law-enforcement tools, while also inviting skepticism from privacy, technology, and education stakeholders concerned about implementation burdens and data handling.
The main likely points of contention are the gaming-platform provisions and the new school instruction mandate. Gaming companies and privacy advocates may object to mandatory age verification, parental-consent workflows, data-sharing requirements, and private rights of action, while supporters would argue these measures are needed to protect minors online. Schools and parents may differ over the grooming-awareness curriculum, especially the scope of required instruction and the parent opt-out process. The camera-footage registry and pink alert program may also raise questions about privacy, evidentiary standards, operational costs, and whether the alert criteria are sufficiently precise to avoid overuse or misuse.