AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 47; Title 50 and Title 61, relative to biometric data.
Impact
Once enacted, SB0339 will significantly bolster protections for individuals against unauthorized use of their biometric data, aligning Tennessee's regulatory framework more closely with existing privacy norms. The bill empowers consumers by allowing them to hold private entities accountable for violations through the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. This means that each infraction can lead to substantial penalties, including monetary damages and attorney fees, thereby incentivizing companies to comply with these new standards.
Summary
Senate Bill 339, titled the 'Consumer Biometric Data Protection Act', seeks to amend the Tennessee Code related to the collection, use, and safeguarding of biometric data. The bill defines critical terms such as 'biometric identifier' and 'biometric information', and sets forth standards for private entities in their handling of such data. Specifically, the legislation mandates that individuals must be informed in writing when their biometric data is being collected, as well as the purpose and duration of its use, and requires that explicit written consent be obtained prior to any data collection.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB0339 appears to be largely favorable among privacy advocates and consumer protection supporters who see it as a necessary measure in the wake of growing concerns about data privacy and security. However, there may be contention from industry groups who are concerned about the potential increased operational costs and the complexity of compliance with the new regulations. This reflects a broader tension between the need for consumer protection and the desire of businesses to operate flexibly without stringent regulatory burdens.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the extent of compliance required, particularly regarding which entities qualify as 'private entities' under the law, and the implications for business practices moving forward. There are concerns that the bill could impose significant costs on businesses that rely on biometric data for operations, such as those in security and technology sectors. Additionally, the requirement for written consent and the defined deadlines for data retention may complicate current business processes, leading to debates about balancing privacy rights with operational feasibility.
Criminal procedure: arrests; required removal of religious head coverings for police photographs; prohibit. Amends 1927 PA 175 (MCL 760.1 - 777.69) by adding sec. 25c to ch. IV.