HF3858 (Legislative Session 94 (2025-2026))

Minnesota Digital Choice Act established, civil penalties established, and administrative rulemaking authorized.

Related bill: SF4100

AI Generated Summary

Purpose

  • Establishes a consumer protection framework called the Minnesota Digital Choice Act to give individuals greater control over their personal data on social media platforms.
  • Creates data rights for users, requires interoperability between platforms through an open protocol, and authorizes penalties and rulemaking to enforce the act.

Key Definitions (essential terms)

  • Open protocol: a publicly available set of rules that enables interoperability and data exchange between social media platforms via a shared data layer, with no licensing fees or patent restrictions.
  • Personal data: information linked or reasonably linkable to an identified or identifiable person, including the person’s social graph.
  • Social graph: data representing a person’s connections, interactions, and engagements on a social media platform, including content generated by the person, connections, responses, mentions, reposts, shares, metadata, and relational references; excludes private messages designated as private by others.
  • Social media company/platform: entities that own or operate social media platforms.
  • User: an individual whose personal data and social graph are involved.
  • Social media platform: as defined within the act’s context (the specific statute reference is included in the bill text).

Data Rights and Access (What individuals can do)

  • Deletion and portability: Users have the right to delete personal data held by a social media company and to obtain a copy of their personal data in a portable, readily usable format that supports data transfer to another user or service, when processing is automated, and not requiring disclosure of trade secrets.
  • How to exercise: Users may submit requests at any time to specify the rights they want to exercise.
  • Response time: Social media companies must fulfill data-right requests within five business days of receipt.

Data Interoperability and Interchange (What must be done to enable cross-platform data sharing)

  • Interoperability interface: Social media companies must implement a transparent, third-party-accessible interoperability interface that allows users to share a common set of their current social graph (or chosen parts) between designated platforms with the user’s permission.
  • Real-time data sharing: The interoperability interface must enable continuous, real-time data sharing among platforms.
  • Open protocol requirement: Interoperability must be based on an open protocol; platforms must maintain reasonable, non-discriminatory terms and set thresholds for frequency, nature, and volume of data requests.
  • Fees and documentation: They may charge reasonable fees for requests beyond established thresholds and must provide complete, accurate, and up-to-date documentation about the interface.
  • Data handling rules: Personal data obtained through the interface must be protected, and social media companies or third parties may not collect, share, or use this data beyond protecting privacy/security or maintaining interoperability.
  • Consent and control: Sharing through the interface requires user consent; providers must adopt a prominent, persistent method for obtaining and honoring user consent and must implement user instructions within five business days.
  • Exclusions: No access to internal inferences, analyses, proprietary algorithms, or other internal operating mechanisms; no transmission of data stored in proprietary formats that aren’t in an open standard, where disclosure would reveal protected information.

Limitations and Protections

  • Privacy and security: Social media companies and third parties must reasonably secure any personal data acquired through interoperability.
  • Consent-driven sharing: Personal data can be shared or received only with the user's consent.
  • Non-disclosure of sensitive internal data: Access to inferences, proprietary algorithms, or formats not widely available as open standards is not required.

Rulemaking and Enforcement (How the law is applied)

  • Rulemaking authority: The attorney general can identify open protocols through rulemaking that meet the act’s requirements.
  • Rebuttable presumption: If a social media company uses an open protocol identified by rules, it is presumed to provide access on reasonable, non-discriminatory terms (rebuttable if shown otherwise).
  • Penalties and remedies: Violating the act can trigger an injunction and civil penalties up to $2,500 per affected user, with penalties pursued by the attorney general under section 8.31.
  • Cost recovery: If the state prevails, the court may award the reasonable value of the state’s litigation expenses to offset enforcement costs, and penalties/expenses are deposited into the special revenue fund to support the attorney general’s enforcement efforts.
  • Private right of action: The act does not authorize a private right of action; enforcement is through the attorney general and related civil processes.

Impact and Scope (What changes may occur)

  • Introduces a broader framework for data portability and cross-platform data sharing across social media networks via an open standard.
  • Shifts some control of personal data from platforms toward users, emphasizing consent, portability, and interoperable access.
  • Establishes a concrete enforcement mechanism with monetary penalties and state-backed oversight, but limits private litigation.

Practical Considerations

  • Platforms would need to implement or integrate an interoperability interface, maintain documentation, and respond to data-right requests within five business days.
  • Organizations must balance user access with privacy, data security, and protection of trade secrets or proprietary systems.

Relevant Terms - Minnesota Digital Choice Act - open protocol - interoperability interface - social graph - personal data - social media platform / social media company - data rights - data portability - data sharing consent - five business days - reasonable terms - non-discrimination - thresholds (frequency, nature, volume) - documentation - privacy and security - rebuttable presumption - attorney general - civil penalty - injunction - section 8.31 - special revenue fund

Bill text versions

Actions

DateChamberWhereTypeNameCommittee Name
March 02, 2026HouseActionIntroduction and first reading, referred toCommerce Finance and Policy

Citations

 
[
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "The bill relies on existing definitions in Minn. Stat. 325M.31 for terms such as 'open protocol', 'social media platform', and 'user', to interpret provisions in the Minnesota Digital Choice Act.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "325M.31",
    "subdivision": ""
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "Provisions authorize enforcement actions and potential remedies consistent with Minn. Stat. 8.31, including court-ordered penalties and recovery of litigation costs through the attorney general.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "8.31",
    "subdivision": ""
  }
]
Loading…