United States law applies in TennesseeTennessee is a state of the United States, whose 134 researched instruments are listed on the United States page, not here. The law of Tennessee, described on this page below, applies here too.
23 of 25 named instruments researched to a stage, across five of the ten areas of law we track: 23 in force. As of .
When each starts21 of 23 carry a date, 2 do not. Earlier is before 2014.
in forcenot yet in forceblocked by a courtproposedno longer in force
Tennessee has not enacted a general AI-transparency or output-labeling statute of the kind the federal baseline document catalogs; its AI-specific statutes instead target unauthorized synthetic depictions of real people.
The Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security (ELVIS) Act (2024) extends the state's Personal Rights Protection Act to make a person liable to a civil action for using an individual's AI-simulated voice, photograph, or likeness without consent, and separately reaches anyone who distributes a tool whose primary purpose is producing such an unauthorized replica.
The Preventing Deepfake Images Act (2025) creates a civil action and a tiered felony offense for disclosing an intimate digital depiction of an identifiable person without consent, reaching an AI-generated or AI-manipulated image or video on the same footing as a manipulated real one.
A separate 2025 act adds a new felony offense, tiered by conduct, for knowingly possessing, distributing, or producing technology, software, or digital tools designed to create AI-generated child sexual abuse material.
The Health Care AI Act (2026) bars any person from advertising or representing that an AI system is, or can act as, a qualified mental health professional, enforceable as an unfair or deceptive act under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act with a five-thousand-dollar per-violation civil penalty.
A bill that would have created a broad felony for training an AI companion system to encourage self-harm or simulate a human being was rewritten twice on the floor: first into a bill establishing a Tennessee Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council, then, in the version the General Assembly actually passed as Public Chapter 1066 of 2026, into a directive for the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) to study artificial intelligence and report to the legislature by ; neither the Council nor the felony offense as introduced became law.
A separate study directive, also assigned to TACIR, asks it to study generative AI chatbot regulation and does not itself impose a duty on any person. Tennessee's 2024 comprehensive privacy statute and its 2003 computer-crime statute are catalogued under the privacy and scraping topics respectively, not here.
Adds a new section to Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 10 (Sexual Offenses) making it an offense for a person to knowingly possess, distribute, or produce technology, software, or digital tools designed for the purpose of creating material that includes a minor engaged in sexual activity or simulated sexual activity that is patently offensive, reaching an AI image-generation tool purpose-built for that use.
Possession is a Class E felony, distribution a Class C felony, and production a Class B felony; a court weighs factors including the defendant's own statements, advertising, and instructional materials in deciding whether a tool was so designed. The enacting Public Chapter leaves the new provision's codified section number to be assigned by the Tennessee Code Commission.
Amends the Personal Rights Protection Act of 1984, renamed the Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act, to add voice to the property right an individual holds in their name, photograph, and likeness, defining voice as a sound readily identifiable and attributable to a particular individual whether or not the sound is the person's actual voice or a simulation of it.
A person who publishes, performs, distributes, or transmits an individual's voice or likeness knowing it was not authorized is liable to a civil action, and the same liability reaches a person who distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available an algorithm, software, tool, or other technology, service, or device whose primary purpose or function is producing a particular identifiable individual's photograph, voice, or likeness, knowing that distributing it was not authorized.
Creates a new part of the criminal code defining an intimate digital depiction as one appearing to show nudity or sexual content and created or altered through digital manipulation, and a deepfake as a video, image, or audio file generated or manipulated by artificial intelligence to realistically portray something that did not occur.
A person who intentionally discloses, or threatens to disclose, an intimate digital depiction of an identifiable individual without consent, knowing or recklessly disregarding that consent was absent, is liable to a civil action and, where the disclosure is intended to harass or cause harm, commits a Class E felony, rising to a Class C felony where the disclosure could reasonably be expected to affect a governmental proceeding, including an election, or facilitate violence.
A provider of an interactive computer service is not liable for content supplied by another person or for good-faith restriction of access to such depictions.
A new section of the mental health code bars a person who develops or deploys an artificial intelligence system from advertising or representing to the public that the system is, or is able to act as, a qualified mental health professional. A violation is a violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977 and, notwithstanding that act's ordinary civil penalty limits, carries its own civil penalty of five thousand dollars per violation.
The act defines artificial intelligence broadly as models and systems capable of performing functions generally associated with human intelligence, including reasoning and learning.
Tennessee's comprehensive private-sector privacy law is the Tennessee Information Protection Act (TIPA), Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-18-3201 to 47-18-3214, enacted as House Bill 1181, Public Chapter 408 of the 113th General Assembly, and effective (the Secretary of State's officially published Public Chapter resolves an apparent 2024-versus-2025 discrepancy between an earlier engrossed bill print and the final signed act in favor of 2025).
Tennessee's biometric-data definition is a categorical, unconditional exclusion of recording-derived data, with no claw-back for an identification purpose, the same structural family as Washington's and Virginia's statutes rather than Maryland's, Minnesota's, or New Jersey's claw-back family.
TIPA ties liability to a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-privacy-framework compliance program through an affirmative defense, a structural feature no other state shares, and its 60-day, mandatory attorney-general cure notice carries no sunset date, unlike Maryland's and Minnesota's expiring cure mechanisms. Tennessee's separate breach-notification statute, commonly cited as Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-18-2107, could not be independently verified against primary text and is not encoded here pending that verification.
TIPA bars any private right of action, including a class action, under TIPA or any other law. Section 47-18-4904(a)(2) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act requires a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company to obtain a consumer's initial express consent for collection, use, or disclosure of genetic data that clearly describes the company's use of the data, specifies who has access to test results, and specifies how the company may share the data.
The life insurance provider section added to part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code bars a life insurance provider from requesting or requiring an individual to whom the insurer provides life insurance coverage, or an individual who applies for life insurance coverage, to take a genetic test as a precondition of insurability, and from requiring the complete genome sequencing of an individual's DNA.
Section 56-2-1006(a) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee to notify the commissioner as soon as practicable, and in no event more than three business days, following a determination that a cybersecurity event has occurred, if the licensee is domiciled in this state or this state is its home state and the event has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer residing in this state or a material part of its normal operations, or if the licensee reasonably believes that the nonpublic information of 250 or more consumers residing in this state is involved and the event must be reported to a government body, self-regulatory agency, or other supervisory body or has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer or a material part of its normal operations.
Rule 0780-1-72-.11(1) bars a licensee from disclosing, directly or through any affiliate, any nonpublic personal information about a consumer to a nonaffiliated third party unless it has provided the initial notice and the opt out notice, has given the consumer a reasonable opportunity to opt out before the disclosure, and the consumer does not opt out.
Section 3(a)(3) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act bars an operator from knowingly selling or renting a student's information, including covered information.
Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 56-2-1005(d), (e)Public Chapter 345 (2021), Tennessee Secretary of State, publications.tnsosfiles.com, read through its web.archive.org capture
Section 56-2-1005(d) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee to maintain records concerning all cybersecurity events for a period of at least five years from the date of discovery of the cybersecurity event. The licensee must provide those records to the commissioner upon request.
Section 56-2-1005(e) requires a licensee that conducts an investigation or review and determines that a potential or suspected event is not a cybersecurity event to reduce that determination to writing, maintain the writing for at least five years from the date of discovery of the event, and provide it to the commissioner upon request.
Section 56-2-1005(a) requires a licensee that learns that a cybersecurity event has or may have occurred to conduct, or to have a designated outside vendor or service provider conduct, a prompt investigation. Section 56-2-1005(c) requires a licensee that learns of an event in a system maintained by a third-party service provider to complete the actions required by subsection (b), or to confirm and document that the provider has completed them.
Section 56-2-1003 defines a licensee as a person licensed, authorized to operate, or registered, or required to be, under title 56. Section 56-2-1009(a)(1) provides that the part does not apply to a licensee that employs fewer than 25 individuals, has less than $5,000,000 in gross annual revenue, or has less than $10,000,000 in year-end total assets. Section 56-2-1010 provides that the commissioner may seek penalties under section 56-2-305 for a violation of the part.
Section 4 of the act that enacted the Insurance Data Security Law provides that, for all purposes other than promulgating rules, the act takes effect and applies to breaches that occur or are discovered on or after that date.
Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 56-2-1006Text of the Insurance Data Security Law as adopted by Senate Amendment 1 to HB 766 and enacted as Public Chapter 345
In force since .Binds private bodies.
What this law does
House Bill 766, assigned Public Chapter Number 345 by the Secretary of State, enacts the Insurance Data Security Law and amends chapter 2 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code.
Section 56-2-1006(a) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee to notify the commissioner as soon as practicable, and in no event more than three business days, following a determination that a cybersecurity event has occurred, if the licensee is domiciled in this state or this state is its home state and the event has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer residing in this state or a material part of its normal operations, or if the licensee reasonably believes that the nonpublic information of 250 or more consumers residing in this state is involved and the event must be reported to a government body, self-regulatory agency, or other supervisory body or has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer or a material part of its normal operations.
Section 56-2-1006(b) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee that must notify the commissioner to provide, in a format directed by the commissioner, as much as is available of a listed set of information, including the date of the event, how the nonpublic information was exposed, how the event was discovered, the number of total consumers in this state affected, and a copy of the licensee's privacy policy, and to continually provide material updates or supplements.
Section 56-2-1006(c) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee, following a determination that a cybersecurity event has occurred and has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer, to notify consumers residing in this state whose nonpublic information has been acquired, or reasonably believed to have been acquired, no later than forty-five days after the determination, unless a longer period is required due to the legitimate needs of law enforcement.
Section 56-2-1006(d) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee that becomes aware of a cybersecurity event in an information system maintained by a third-party service provider to treat the event as if it occurred in its own system, with its time limits running from when the provider notifies it or it otherwise gains actual knowledge, whichever is sooner.
Section 56-2-1006(e) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires a licensee acting as an assuming insurer that does not have a direct contractual relationship with the affected consumers to notify the affected ceding insurers and the commissioner of the licensee's state of domicile within three business days of determining that a cybersecurity event has occurred.
Section 56-2-1006(f) of the Insurance Data Security Law requires an insurer, where consumer notice is required, to notify the producers of record of all affected consumers, if known, as soon as practicable but not later than when the notice is provided to the affected consumers, and excuses the insurer where it does not have the current producer of record information for an individual consumer.
Section 56-2-1009(a)(1) of the Insurance Data Security Law provides that the part does not apply to a licensee that employs fewer than 25 individuals, has less than $5,000,000 in gross annual revenue, or has less than $10,000,000 in year-end total assets. Section 56-2-1002(b) of the Insurance Data Security Law provides that the part does not create or imply a private cause of action for a violation of the part, and does not limit a private cause of action that otherwise exists.
Section 56-2-1010 of the Insurance Data Security Law provides that the commissioner may seek penalties under section 56-2-305 for a violation of the part. Section 4 of the act that enacted the Insurance Data Security Law provides that, for all purposes other than promulgating rules, the act takes effect and applies to breaches that occur or are discovered on or after that date. Public Chapter 345 was signed by the Governor on .
The House adopted Amendment 1 (HA0155) on . The Senate adopted Senate Amendment 1 (SA0267) on , passed the bill as amended on , and the House concurred in the Senate amendment. Senate Commerce and Labor Amendment 1 to SB0725, which names Senate Bill 725 and House Bill 766, deletes all language after the enacting clause and substitutes the Insurance Data Security Law.
Section 56-2-1009(a)(2) and (3) of the Insurance Data Security Law treat a licensee subject to the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy, security and breach notification rules that maintains nonpublic information in the same manner as protected health information, and a licensee subject to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as meeting the consumer notice requirement of section 56-2-1006(c) if the licensee is compliant with the federal law and submits a written statement certifying its compliance.
Section 56-2-305 of the Tennessee Code, in the May 2021 archive copy, lets the commissioner, after notice and a contested case hearing, order an insurer, person or entity required to be licensed by the division of insurance that has violated any statute, rule or order to cease and desist, to pay a monetary penalty of not more than $1,000 for each violation up to an aggregate of $100,000, and to suspend or revoke its license, and sets a higher tier for a knowing violation.
Section 56-2-305 of the Tennessee Code, in the May 2021 archive copy, does not apply to individual or business entity insurance producers licensed under chapter 6, part 1 of title 56.
TIPA governs private-sector processing of Tennessee residents' personal information, enacted as House Bill 1181, Public Chapter 408 of the 113th General Assembly. The bill passed the House and was approved by the Governor in May 2023; a floor amendment moved the general effective date from an engrossed print's to the signed Public Chapter's , which the Secretary of State's official publication confirms as authoritative.
A separate data protection impact assessment look-back date, , is unaffected by the general effective-date correction.
Rule 0780-1-72-.02(1) of the Rules of the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance governs the treatment of nonpublic personal information about individuals by all licensees of the Insurance Division, requires a licensee to provide notice to individuals about its privacy policies and practices, describes the conditions under which a licensee may disclose nonpublic personal information to affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties, and provides methods for individuals to prevent a licensee from disclosing that information.
Rule 0780-1-72-.02(2) applies to nonpublic personal information about individuals who obtain or are claimants or beneficiaries of products or services primarily for personal, family or household purposes from licensees, and does not apply to information about companies or about individuals who obtain products or services for business, commercial or agricultural purposes.
Rule 0780-1-72-.04 defines a licensee as all licensed insurers, agents and other persons licensed or required to be licensed, or authorized or required to be authorized, or registered or required to be registered pursuant to the Tennessee Insurance Law, codified at title 56 of the Tennessee Code.
Rule 0780-1-72-.04 defines nonpublic personal information as personally identifiable financial information and any list, description or other grouping of consumers, and publicly available information pertaining to them, that is derived using personally identifiable financial information that is not publicly available.
Rule 0780-1-72-.05(1) requires a licensee to provide a clear and conspicuous notice that accurately reflects its privacy policies and practices to a customer not later than when the licensee establishes a customer relationship, and to a consumer before the licensee discloses any nonpublic personal information about the consumer to a nonaffiliated third party other than as rules .15 and .16 authorize.
Rule 0780-1-72-.06(1) requires a licensee to provide customers a clear and conspicuous notice that accurately reflects its privacy policies and practices not less than annually during the continuation of the customer relationship.
Rule 0780-1-72-.07(1) requires each initial, annual and revised privacy notice to include the categories of nonpublic personal information the licensee collects and discloses, the categories of affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties to whom it discloses, an explanation of the consumer's right to opt out and how to exercise it, and the licensee's policies and practices for protecting the confidentiality and security of nonpublic personal information.
Rule 0780-1-72-.08(1) requires a licensee that must provide an opt out notice to give each consumer a clear and conspicuous notice that states that the licensee discloses or reserves the right to disclose nonpublic personal information about the consumer to a nonaffiliated third party, that the consumer has the right to opt out of that disclosure, and a reasonable means by which the consumer may exercise the opt out right.
Rule 0780-1-72-.11(1) bars a licensee from disclosing, directly or through any affiliate, any nonpublic personal information about a consumer to a nonaffiliated third party unless it has provided the initial notice and the opt out notice, has given the consumer a reasonable opportunity to opt out before the disclosure, and the consumer does not opt out.
Rule 0780-1-72-.13(1) bars a licensee from disclosing, other than to a consumer reporting agency, a policy number or similar access number or access code for a consumer's policy or transaction account to a nonaffiliated third party for use in telemarketing, direct mail marketing or other marketing through electronic mail to the consumer.
Rule 0780-1-72-.23 bars a licensee from unfairly discriminating against a consumer or customer because the consumer or customer has opted out of the disclosure of nonpublic personal information, and does not prohibit licensees from engaging in their appropriate or acceptable methods for insurance underwriting. Rule 0780-1-72-.24 subjects any violation of the rule to the penalties delineated or referenced in Public Chapter 107 of the 2001 Public Acts.
Rule 0780-1-72-.26(1) states that the regulations impose substantially and materially the same requirements as the Public Necessity Rules that became effective . Rule 0780-1-72-.26(2) requires a licensee to provide an initial notice to consumers who are its customers on by that date. Rule 0780-1-72 was filed on and became effective on .
Section 1 of the 2001 act on the disclosure of nonpublic personal information by insurance licensees provides that a person who discloses nonpublic personal information contrary to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, or who violates a rule lawfully promulgated under the section, engages in an unfair or deceptive act or practice, subjecting the person to the penalties delineated in section 56-8-109.
Section 2 of the 2001 act on the disclosure of nonpublic personal information by insurance licensees provides that nothing in the act creates a private cause of action and that the Commissioner of the Department of Commerce and Insurance is responsible for enforcement of the act. Section 3 of the 2001 act on the disclosure of nonpublic personal information by insurance licensees provides that, for all purposes other than rulemaking, the act takes effect .
Tennessee consumers may confirm processing, access, correct, delete, obtain a portable copy, and opt out of targeted advertising, sale, and certain profiling. A controller must respond without undue delay and in all cases within 45 days of receipt, extendable once by 45 additional days when reasonably necessary; a denial must be communicated within 45 days, and an appeal decision must issue within 60 days of receipt.
TIPA is enforced exclusively by the Tennessee Attorney General and Reporter, who must provide a controller or processor 60 days' written notice identifying the specific violated provisions before suing; this cure notice is mandatory, not discretionary, and the text carries no sunset clause anywhere, unlike Maryland's and Minnesota's expiring cure mechanisms. A court may award relief to each affected consumer regardless of actual damages, and treble damages for a willful or knowing violation.
TIPA's voluntary privacy program provision, section 47-18-3213 of the Tennessee Code, is an affirmative defense and not a duty: a controller or processor that creates, maintains, and complies with a written privacy policy that reasonably conforms to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) privacy framework Version 1.0, or to other documented policies, standards, and procedures designed to safeguard consumer privacy, has a defense to a cause of action for a violation of TIPA, provided the policy is updated to reasonably conform to a revision of the NIST or a comparable privacy framework within two years of the publication date stated in the most recent revision, and provides a person with the substantive rights TIPA requires.
TIPA bars any private right of action, including a class action, under TIPA or other law.
House Bill 1310, assigned Public Chapter Number 324 by the Secretary of State, enacts the Genetic Information Privacy Act and amends title 47 of the Tennessee Code.
Section 47-18-4902(4) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act defines a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company as an entity that offers consumer genetic testing products or services directly to a consumer, or collects, uses, or analyzes genetic data that resulted from a direct-to-consumer genetic testing product or service and was provided to the company by a consumer, and excludes a law enforcement agency and an entity engaged in research conducted in accordance with the federal human-subjects rules.
Section 47-18-4903 of the Genetic Information Privacy Act provides that the part does not apply to protected health information collected by a covered entity or business associate, a public or private institution of higher education, an entity owned or operated by one, biomedical or academic research conducted by a research hospital, academic medical center or affiliated entity that is not a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, genetic data shared with or by such an entity for biomedical or academic research or to find causes of or cures for a disease or medical condition, or the sharing of genetic data that does not require consent under the federal human-subjects rules.
Section 47-18-4904(a)(1) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act requires a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company to provide a consumer essential information about its collection, use, and disclosure of genetic data and a prominent, publicly available privacy notice covering its data collection, consent, use, access, disclosure, transfer, security, retention, and deletion practices.
Section 47-18-4904(a)(2) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act requires a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company to obtain a consumer's initial express consent for collection, use, or disclosure of genetic data that clearly describes the company's use of the data, specifies who has access to test results, and specifies how the company may share the data.
Section 47-18-4904(a)(3) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act requires a company that engages in the listed conduct to obtain a consumer's separate express consent for transfer of genetic data to a person other than its vendors and service providers, for use beyond the primary purpose and for retention of a biological sample after the initial testing, informed consent under the federal human-subjects rules for transfer to a third party for research, and express consent for marketing based on the genetic data.
Section 47-18-4904(a)(4) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act requires a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company to require valid legal process for its disclosure of a consumer's genetic data to law enforcement or a government entity without the consumer's express written consent.
Section 47-18-4904(a)(5) and (6) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act require a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive security program to protect a consumer's genetic data against unauthorized access, use, or disclosure, and to provide a process for a consumer to access the genetic data, delete the account and genetic data, and destroy the biological sample.
Section 47-18-4904(b) of the Genetic Information Privacy Act allows a company with a first-party relationship to a consumer to provide customized content or offers on its website or through its application or service without the consumer's express consent to marketing.
Section 47-18-4905 of the Genetic Information Privacy Act bars a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company from disclosing a consumer's genetic data to an entity that offers health insurance, life insurance, or long-term care insurance, or to an employer of the consumer, without first obtaining the consumer's written consent.
Section 47-18-4906 of the Genetic Information Privacy Act makes the division of consumer affairs in the office of the attorney general and reporter responsible for enforcing the part, requires the division to establish a means for a consumer to submit a complaint, and requires it to promulgate rules. Section 2 of the act that enacted the Genetic Information Privacy Act provides that the Act takes effect , and applies to conduct occurring on or after that date.
Public Chapter 324 was signed by the Governor on . The House adopted Amendment 1 (HA0269) on . The Senate withdrew Senate Amendment 1 (SA0282) on , substituted the House bill for its companion Senate bill, and passed it on . Amendment 1 to HB1310 in House Commerce deletes all language after the enacting clause and substitutes the Genetic Information Privacy Act.
House Bill 1309, assigned Public Chapter Number 246 by the Secretary of State, prohibits a life insurance provider from canceling a life insurance policy based on genetic information, from requesting or requiring genetic testing as a condition of insurability, and from accessing the genetic data of an individual without consent, and amends part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code.
The life insurance provider section added to part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code bars a life insurance provider from canceling insurance coverage for an individual or a family member of an individual based solely on the individual's or family member's genetic information.
The life insurance provider section added to part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code bars a life insurance provider from requesting or requiring an individual to whom the insurer provides life insurance coverage, or an individual who applies for life insurance coverage, to take a genetic test as a precondition of insurability, and from requiring the complete genome sequencing of an individual's DNA.
The life insurance provider section added to part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code bars a life insurance provider from accessing sensitive medical information, including the genetic data of an individual, without first obtaining the individual's signed, written consent.
The life insurance provider section added to part 27 of chapter 7 of title 56 of the Tennessee Code does not prevent a life insurance provider from requesting or obtaining existing health information for underwriting, including genetic information contained within an individual's medical record. The act that added the life insurance provider section defines a life insurance provider as an insurer or other entity providing life insurance coverage.
The act that added the life insurance provider section provides that, for all purposes other than promulgating rules, the act takes effect and applies to policies of insurance entered into, issued, amended, or renewed on or after that date. Public Chapter 246 was signed by the Governor on . Section 1 of the act deletes section 56-7-2701 in its entirety.
Sections 3 to 7 of the act change part 27's existing sections to refer to a health insurance provider, delete the words life insurance policy from section 56-7-2705, and extend section 56-7-2706 to a health insurer or life insurer. The bill page for HB1309 lists no amendments for HB1309 or for its companion SB1294. The Senate substituted the House bill for its companion bill and passed it on , after the House passed it on .
Section 56-2-305 of the Tennessee Code, in the May 2021 archive copy, lets the commissioner, after notice and a contested case hearing, order an insurer, person or entity required to be licensed by the division of insurance that has violated any statute, rule or order to cease and desist, to pay a monetary penalty of not more than $1,000 for each violation up to an aggregate of $100,000, and to suspend or revoke its license, and sets a higher tier for a knowing violation.
Tenn. Code Ann. secs. 49-1-702, 49-1-708Text of the Student Online Personal Protection Act as adopted by House Education Administration and Planning Amendment 1 to HB 1931 and…
In force since .Binds public and private bodies.
What this law does
House Bill 1931, assigned Public Chapter Number 757 by the Secretary of State, enacts the Student Online Personal Protection Act and amends title 49 of the Tennessee Code. The Student Online Personal Protection Act defines an operator as the operator of an Internet web site, online service, online application, or mobile application with actual knowledge that the site, service, or application is used primarily for K-12 school purposes and is designed and marketed for K-12 school purposes.
The Student Online Personal Protection Act defines covered information as personally identifiable information or material, or information linked to it, in any media or format that is not publicly available and is created by or provided to an operator by a student or the student's parent or legal guardian, created by or provided to an operator by an employee or agent of a K-12 school or a local education agency, or gathered by an operator through its site, service, or application for K-12 school purposes and personally identifies a student.
Section 3(a)(1) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act bars an operator from knowingly engaging in targeted advertising on its site, service, or application, or targeting advertising on any other site, service, or application based on any information, including covered information and persistent unique identifiers, that the operator has acquired because of the use of its site, service, or application for K-12 school purposes.
Section 3(a)(2) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act bars an operator from knowingly using information, including persistent unique identifiers, created or gathered by its site, service, or application to amass a profile about a student except in furtherance of K-12 school purposes. Section 3(a)(3) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act bars an operator from knowingly selling or renting a student's information, including covered information.
Section 3(a)(4) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act bars an operator from knowingly disclosing covered information unless the disclosure falls within the listed grounds, such as furtherance of the K-12 school purpose, legal and regulatory compliance, the judicial process, protecting safety or security, a school, educational, or employment purpose requested by the student or parent, or a third party that the operator contractually bars from using the information for any other purpose.
Section 3(c) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act requires an operator to implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the covered information, and to delete a student's covered information within a reasonable time if the K-12 school or local education agency requests deletion, unless a student or parent or legal guardian consents to its maintenance.
Section 3(g)(1) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act provides that any violation of the section constitutes an unfair or deceptive act or practice affecting the conduct of trade or commerce under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977 and shall be enforced solely by the attorney general and reporter in the attorney general's discretion.
Section 3(g)(2) of the Student Online Personal Protection Act provides that in an action brought by the attorney general the court may award or impose any relief available under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977. Section 4 of the Student Online Personal Protection Act provides that the act takes effect . Public Chapter 757 was signed by the Governor on . The House adopted Amendment 1 (HA0885) on .
The Senate substituted the House bill for its companion bill and passed it on . Amendment 1 (SA0883) to SB1900, the companion Senate bill, was withdrawn on . Education Administration and Planning Amendment 1 to HB1931 deletes all language after the caption and substitutes the Student Online Personal Protection Act.
Section 49-1-708 of the Tennessee Code, in the May 2021 archive copy, is headed Student online personal protection act and opens with the prohibition that an operator shall not knowingly engage in targeted advertising on the operator's site, service, or application. The history note of section 49-1-708 in the May 2021 archive copy of the Tennessee Code lists Acts 2016, chapter 757, section 3.
TIPA classifies information revealing racial or ethnic origin, religious beliefs, a mental or physical health diagnosis, sexual orientation, or citizenship or immigration status; the processing of genetic or biometric data to uniquely identify a natural person; a known child's personal information; and precise geolocation data as sensitive data.
"Biometric data" is defined as data generated by automatic measurement of biological characteristics used to identify a specific individual, but categorically and unconditionally excludes a physical or digital photograph, video recording, or audio recording, or data generated from one, with no claw-back for an identification purpose.
This is the single most consequential difference from Maryland, Minnesota, and New Jersey in this same wave: a faceprint or voiceprint a product derives from a recording specifically to identify a person is never "biometric data" in Tennessee, and therefore never triggers TIPA's sensitive-data consent duty on that basis alone. No dedicated Tennessee biometric-privacy statute beyond TIPA's sensitive-data treatment was found.
Tennessee's computer-crime statute answers the authorization question in its own words. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-601 defines authorization as any and all forms of consent, including both implicit and explicit consent, and § 39-14-602(c), as restated by Public Chapter 1042 of 2022 (effective ), provides that operating a computer network in such a way as to allow anonymous access to that network constitutes implicit consent to access under the part.
A page anyone can open is therefore access the operator has consented to by the statute's own text. The statute also makes it an offense to make an unauthorized copy of computer data (§ 39-14-602(a)(1)(B)), and there too authorization means any form of consent. Neither the definition of authorization nor § 39-14-602 says that use outside accepted terms makes consent ineffective, so the test is whether the owner gave permission, read broadly to include implicit consent.
The implied consent attaches to how the operator runs the network, and the statute does not say whether a cease-and-desist letter or a robots.txt directive, which leave the network open, displaces it; no Tennessee decision applies the clause to a crawler, so both questions are open. A CAPTCHA, IP block or rate limit is different in kind.
Subsection (c) does not mention barriers, but it implies consent only from operating a network so as to allow anonymous access, which a barrier withholds from the visitor it stops, and § 39-14-602(b)(1)(A) adds no element beyond intentional access without authorization, so getting past such a barrier is access without any form of consent.
Terms of use are governed by Tennessee's general law of assent. In Staubach Retail Services-Southeast, LLC v. H.G. Hill Realty Co. (Tenn. 2005), a lease dispute, the Tennessee Supreme Court judged assent by the parties' objective manifestations and held that a party who signs a contract incorporating separate terms accepts them, and that a party who could have refused and instead performs under them shows assent.
Applied to online terms, terms accepted at signup bind, and terms shown only by a link bind only where the visitor had notice of them. No Tennessee appellate decision applies either rule to a crawler, and none applies consumer-protection or unfair-competition law to scraping. Tennessee has little case law on trespass to chattels.
A federal court applying Tennessee law (Holt v. Macy's Retail Holdings, Inc., W.D. Tenn. 2010) called it virtually nonexistent and applied Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 217 to 220, under which liability follows where the chattel is impaired or its use is lost for a substantial time, and the Court of Appeals (Garner v. Coffee County Bank, 2015) described the tort by § 217(b) as intentional intermeddling with another's personal property without authorization, so a claim over server load needs measurable harm.
Copyright, text-and-data-mining and database rights are governed by federal law alone, including the unsettled question whether commercial mining is fair use, and Tennessee adds no mining exception or opt-out.
No Tennessee statute specifically governs AI training data: the ELVIS Act (2024) makes a person liable for knowingly using or publishing an individual's voice or likeness without authorization and for distributing a tool whose primary purpose is producing a particular person's likeness, and its text does not mention training. No Tennessee statute or decision gives robots.txt legal weight of its own.
Tennessee's comprehensive privacy law, the Tennessee Information Protection Act (Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-18-3201 to 47-18-3214), is covered by the privacy topic and is not restated here; it applies only to persons with more than $25 million in revenue that also meet a consumer-volume test, and it excludes publicly available information from personal information.
Section 39-14-602 of the Tennessee Code, part of the Tennessee Personal and Commercial Computer Act of 2003, as restated by Public Chapter 1042 of 2022, which deleted subsections (a) through (c) and substituted the text described here (effective , for acts on or after that date). Subsection (b)(1) makes it an offense to intentionally and without authorization, directly or indirectly, access any computer, computer system, or computer network, a Class A misdemeanor.
Subsection (a)(1)(B) makes it an offense to intentionally and without authorization, directly or indirectly, alter, damage, destroy or disrupt a computer or its data, or make or cause to be made an unauthorized copy of computer data, computer programs or computer software, with penalties under § 39-14-105. Subsection (c) provides that operating a computer network in such a way as to allow anonymous access to that network constitutes implicit consent to access under the part.
Tennessee's security-topic instruments are sector rules: the insurance data security law, the 2022 utility cybersecurity plan law and the Public Utility Commission's 72-hour notice rule, and the duties on state entities to report cyber incidents and refuse ransom payments, each filed as a row of its own.
Its closest law, Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 29-34-215, added by 2024 Public Chapter 991 (House Bill 2434) to Title 29, Chapter 34, Part 2 and signed into law on , provides that a private entity is not liable in a class action lawsuit resulting from a cybersecurity event unless the cybersecurity event was caused by willful and wanton misconduct or gross negligence on the part of the private entity.
Unlike the framework-conforming safe harbors this topic has already researched in Utah, Ohio, Iowa and Connecticut, Tennessee's shield names no cybersecurity framework and imposes no written-program requirement of any kind: a private entity may claim it regardless of its security posture, so long as the cybersecurity event itself was not the product of willful, wanton, or grossly negligent conduct.
It is a liability-exposure modifier rather than a checkable duty, the same shape as the affirmative-defense-free liability limits this topic declines to file elsewhere (Nebraska's own R.S. 87-1201, this jurisdiction's product-liability-directive precedent): there is nothing here a developer can build a compliance program toward, so it is recorded in this summary rather than filed as an instrument.
Tennessee's separate Information Protection Act (TIPA) carries its own affirmative defense at Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 47-18-3213, cross-referenced from the controller data-security duty at Sec. 47-18-3204(a)(3), but that defense answers only a TIPA claim and is conditioned on a written privacy policy conforming to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Privacy Framework rather than a cybersecurity framework; both sections are TIPA's own clauses and this jurisdiction's privacy-topic rows, not repeated here.
No enacted Tennessee statute is confirmed in the primary text consulted here to set security requirements a connected device or software product must meet to be placed on the market, comparable to California's or Oregon's connected-device statutes or the Cyber Resilience Act, and none outside the sector rules above is confirmed to impose a private-sector duty to report a vulnerability or a security incident to an authority or to users; that reading rests on the sources consulted for this visit rather than a further dedicated search of the point.
Tennessee's Insurance Data Security Law, Tenn. Code Ann. Title 56, Chapter 2, Part 10 (based on the NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law and effective ), requires an insurance licensee to develop, implement and maintain a written information security program and to notify the Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance of a cybersecurity event under Sec. 56-2-1006; its program duty is filed as a row of its own, and the notice to the Commissioner is this jurisdiction's privacy-topic row; Tennessee's state-chartered banks are examined against federal FFIEC standards rather than a state-specific regime comparable to New York's DFS Part 500.
Tennessee's breach-notification statute, Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 47-18-2107, requires an information holder to disclose a breach of system security to affected residents within 45 days and arms an injured customer with its own private right of action; it carries no safeguards or data-security duty of its own, so Tennessee does not carry the standalone safeguards-and-disposal duty some other states split out of their breach-notification statute, and the section itself is this jurisdiction's privacy-topic row rather than repeated here.
The Insurance Data Security Law, in Public Chapter 345 of 2021, requires an insurance licensee to maintain a written information security program. A Tennessee public utility providing electric, water, wastewater, or natural gas services must prepare and implement a cyber security plan under section 65-4-127. The Public Utility Commission's rule requires a utility to notify its Executive Director of a cybersecurity incident that interrupts service within 72 hours.
Cooperatives and county-owned or municipal-owned utilities answer to the comptroller of the treasury under the same act. A state entity may not pay a ransom and must notify the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation of a ransom request. State agencies must report unauthorized data acquisition and security system breaches to the Comptroller of the Treasury.
The Insurance Data Security Law requires each licensee to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive, written information security program based on its risk assessment. A licensee must establish a written incident response plan designed to promptly respond to and recover from a cybersecurity event. A licensee that learns a cybersecurity event has or may have occurred must conduct a prompt investigation.
The Law does not apply to a licensee with fewer than 25 individuals, less than $5,000,000 in gross annual revenue, or less than $10,000,000 in year-end total assets. The commissioner may seek penalties under section 56-2-305 for a violation of the Law. The Law takes effect on .
A public utility that provides electric, water, wastewater, or natural gas services must prepare and implement a cyber security plan to protect its facilities from unauthorized use, alteration, ransom, or destruction of electronic data, and must annually submit documentation of its compliance to the commission by July 1. A utility must assess and update the plan at least once every two years to address new threats.
The documentation must be made in writing and under oath by the chief executive officer, president, or other person with an equivalent role of the utility. A utility that fails to comply is subject to reasonable sanctions ordered by the commission as described in rule.
The Commission's rule requires the annual filing to include contact information for the employees responsible for cybersecurity, a statement whether the utility conducts annual cybersecurity training, and a statement whether the utility has procured cybersecurity insurance. Public Chapter 1111 was signed into law on .
For the part on utility cyber security plans, a utility means an entity subject to the jurisdiction of the water and wastewater financing board or the utility management review board, a cooperative, or a county-owned or municipal-owned utility that provides electric, natural gas, or propane services to the public.
A utility must prepare and implement a cyber security plan by , or within one year after the utility is formed, whichever is later, and must assess and update it every two years to address new threats. The comptroller of the treasury, or the comptroller's designee, must verify each year that a utility has implemented a cyber security plan.
For a cooperative or a county-owned or municipal-owned utility that has not implemented or updated a plan, the comptroller must impose reasonable sanctions. The comptroller of the treasury enforces the part and may promulgate rules necessary to effectuate it. Public Chapter 1111 was signed into law on .
Tenn. Code Ann. sec. 8-4-119Statement of Tenn. Code Ann. section 8-4-119 by the Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury
In force since .Binds government bodies.
What this law does
State agencies must notify the Comptroller of the Treasury of any confirmed or suspected unauthorized acquisition of computerized data and any confirmed or suspected breach of a computer information system or related security system. The Comptroller states that the report should be made within five working days after confirming or suspecting the unauthorized acquisition or breach.
A state agency is not required to notify the Comptroller of individual occurrences of malware or spyware unless the occurrence led to the unauthorized acquisition of computerized data or compromises a security system established to safeguard data and computer information systems.
A state entity must not submit payment to an entity that has engaged in a cybersecurity incident by encrypting data and then offering to decrypt it in exchange for a ransom payment. A state entity experiencing a ransom request in connection with a cybersecurity incident must immediately notify and consult with the technology and innovation division of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
A state entity does not include a vendor, contractor, insurance company, law firm, or other third party that has a contract, or does other business, with a state entity. The act takes effect upon becoming a law.
A utility must electronically notify the Commission's Executive Director of any cybersecurity incident that results in interruption of service within 72 hours after discovery and confirmation. Where law enforcement prohibits notice or recommends against it to avoid compromising an investigation, notification is required within 24 hours after the restriction is lifted.
The rule defines a cybersecurity incident to include an event that is under investigation as a possible incident without final determination of its root cause or nature. The rules apply to a public utility that provides electric, water, wastewater, or natural gas services. After a hearing, the Commission may impose reasonable sanctions, including civil and monetary penalties, against a utility in non-compliance with the rules.
Commission Staff has cited Rule -.04, which sets the information required in the annual filing, in a complaint against a utility that did not file its cybersecurity documentation by .
Tennessee's Protect Tennessee Minors Act (adult content age verification, enacted 2024, effective 2025) and Protecting Children from Social Media Act (enacted 2024, effective 2025) are both currently enforceable, though both remain under active federal court challenge.
The Sixth Circuit vacated an injunction against the adult content law on following the Supreme Court's decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, and remanded for further proceedings; on the district court denied the Attorney General's motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On the Sixth Circuit vacated the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction against the social media law and remanded for further consideration of that motion.
An app store age verification bill (HB 2254) died in a House subcommittee in 2026, and Tennessee has not enacted a design code law.
Requires an individual or commercial entity that publishes or distributes a website on which one third or more of total content is content harmful to minors to perform reasonable age verification before granting access, and to re-verify after each age-verified session of at most 60 minutes. Verifiers must retain seven years of anonymized age verification data and may not retain personally identifying information. A violation is a Class C felony.
Requires social media companies to verify the age of prospective Tennessee account holders, obtain express parental consent before a minor under 18 can create or keep an account, let a parent revoke that consent, and provide parents supervisory tools including privacy settings visibility, daily time restrictions, and mandatory breaks.
These areas of law were researched here and no instrument was recorded. Each finding says what the research checked, as of the date under it. It describes our search, not a guarantee that no such law exists.
Reuse law
Tennessee has not enacted a press-publisher neighbouring right, a mandatory platform-to-publisher bargaining code, or a hot-news misappropriation statute, and no bill comparable to California's since-died Journalism Preservation Act or Australia's News Media Bargaining Code has been identified in the Tennessee General Assembly.
Tennessee's Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-1701 et seq., reaches only information that derives independent economic value from not being generally known and that is the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy, which published news reporting is not, so it supplies no basis for a claim against an aggregator.
No Tennessee court decision recognizing a state common-law hot-news misappropriation doctrine, comparable to California's Balboa Insurance or New York's NBA v. Motorola line, was identified. Snippet reproduction, linking and framing, and text-and-data-mining questions in Tennessee are governed by the federal Copyright Act and the federal hot-news and linking case law already catalogued in the national aggregation document.
As of .
Case law
No current case law for Tennessee AI law
No current case law for Tennessee privacy law
No current case law for Tennessee scraping law
No current case law for Tennessee cybersecurity law
No current case law for Tennessee communications law
No current case law for Tennessee content moderation law
No current case law for Tennessee product and AI liability law
No current case law for Tennessee digital accessibility law
No current case law for Tennessee age gating law
No current case law for Tennessee reuse law
Reporting clocks that run here20 instruments
The instruments whose obligation lines set a deadline for reporting an incident, a vulnerability or a personal-data breach, each deadline read from the sentence that carries it and listed shortest first. The law of Tennessee comes first, then the law of the bodies above it that applies here.
Each flag is one law, and a link to it. Read down the scale: the clocks document's time axis, with the empty stretches shortened so the deadlines sit close. Flags on one line set the same duty at the same deadline, and the laws behind them are named to the right, with what each clock counts from.
The deadlines above on one time axis, shortest at the top. The axis keeps its order and, between neighbors, its proportion, but a stretch with no deadline on it is shortened, so the hour marks on the left are what say how far apart two stations really are. Beside each action, the laws that set it, what each counts from, and a status where the law is not yet in force. The List tab has the same data in full, with the sentences.
Electronically notify the Commission's Executive Director of any cybersecurity incident that results in interruption of service within 72 hours after discovery and confirmation.
Unless law enforcement prohibits or recommends against notice to avoid compromising an investigation, notify on that clock; where it does, notify within 24 hours after the restriction is lifted by law enforcement.
As a licensee, notify the commissioner as soon as practicable, and in no event more than three business days, following a determination that a cybersecurity event has occurred, if you are domiciled in Tennessee (an insurer) or Tennessee is your home state (a producer) and the event has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer residing in Tennessee or a material part of your normal operations (section 56-2-1006(a)(1)).
After you determine that a cybersecurity event has a reasonable likelihood of materially harming a consumer, notify Tennessee consumers whose nonpublic information has been, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired, no later than 45 days after the determination unless law enforcement needs a longer period, by written notice, electronic notice consistent with 15 U.S.C. 7001 or your primary method of communication with the consumer, or the substitute notice the section describes (section 56-2-1006(c)).
As an assuming insurer with no direct contractual relationship with the affected consumers, notify the affected ceding insurers and the commissioner of your state of domicile within three business days of determining that a cybersecurity event has occurred, or of your third-party service provider's notice or your actual knowledge, whichever is sooner (section 56-2-1006(e)).
As an insurer, notify the producers of record of all affected consumers, if known, as soon as practicable but not later than when notice is provided to the affected consumers, unless you do not have the current producer of record information for an individual consumer (section 56-2-1006(f)).
When a state entity experiences a ransom request in connection with a cybersecurity incident, immediately notify and consult with the technology and innovation division of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
The law of the United States, which applies in Tennessee
Notify the NRC Headquarters Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System within one hour after discovery of a cyberattack that adversely impacted safety-related or important-to-safety functions, security functions, or emergency preparedness functions (including offsite communications), or that compromised support systems and equipment resulting in adverse impacts to those functions.
Also notify within one hour after discovery of a cyberattack that adversely impacted the safety, security, and emergency preparedness functions performed by digital assets described in 10 CFR 73.77(a)(1)(ii).
Notify the NRC Headquarters Operations Center within four hours after discovery of a cyberattack that could have caused such an adverse impact, after discovery of a suspected or actual cyberattack initiated by personnel with physical or electronic access to the systems in scope, or after notifying a local, State, or other Federal agency of an event related to your cyber security program that does not otherwise require notification.
Notify the NRC Headquarters Operations Center within eight hours after receipt or collection of information regarding observed behavior, activities, or statements that may indicate intelligence gathering or pre-operational planning related to a cyberattack against the systems in scope.
Use the site corrective action program to record vulnerabilities, weaknesses, failures and deficiencies in your cyber security program, and the notifications you make, within twenty-four hours of their discovery.
Once the final rule takes effect, report a covered cyber incident to the Agency not later than 72 hours after your organization reasonably believes that the covered cyber incident has occurred.
Once the final rule takes effect, report a ransom payment to the Agency not later than 24 hours after your organization makes the payment, even where the underlying ransomware attack is not itself a covered cyber incident.
Once the final rule takes effect, promptly submit an update to a previously submitted covered cyber incident report whenever substantial new or different information becomes available or a ransom payment is later made, continuing until your organization notifies the Agency that the incident has concluded and been fully mitigated and resolved, and preserve data relevant to the incident or payment under the procedures the final rule establishes.
Upon any responsible SCI personnel having a reasonable basis to conclude that an SCI event has occurred, begin appropriate corrective action and notify the Commission of the SCI event immediately.
Within 24 hours of that conclusion, submit a written notification to the Commission, made on a good faith, best efforts basis, that describes the SCI event and the systems affected and, to the extent available, your assessment of the market participants potentially affected, the potential impact on the market, and the steps you have taken, are taking or plan to take.
If the SCI event is resolved and the investigation closed within 30 calendar days, submit a final written notification within five business days after resolution. If not, submit an interim written notification within 30 calendar days after the event, and a final one within five business days after resolution and closure.
If your organization is a banking organization, notify your primary federal banking regulator, the OCC, the Federal Reserve Board, or the FDIC, whichever supervises it, about a notification incident, as soon as possible and no later than 36 hours after your organization determines that a notification incident has occurred.
A notification incident is the subset of computer-security incidents that has materially disrupted or degraded, or is reasonably likely to materially disrupt or degrade, your ability to serve customers, a business line, or an operation whose failure would threaten the financial stability of the United States, so a computer-security incident that falls short of that threshold does not by itself start this clock.
If your organization is a bank service provider, notify at least one bank-designated point of contact at each affected banking organization customer as soon as possible after your organization determines that it has experienced a computer-security incident that has materially disrupted or degraded, or is reasonably likely to materially disrupt or degrade, covered services provided to that banking organization for a period of four hours or more.
This duty carries a standard, as soon as possible, rather than a fixed number of hours to notify by, and that disruption threshold is what engages the duty rather than a period to notify within.
If you are a developer or provider of a frontier AI model, or an operator of critical infrastructure that uses an AI model to manage industrial control systems or other operational technologies, report any confirmed AI safety incident or AI security incident within 30 days of confirmation, and within 72 hours if the incident poses an imminent threat to national security, critical infrastructure or public safety.
If your organization is a federally insured credit union, notify the NCUA-designated point of contact of a reportable cyber incident by email, telephone, or another method the NCUA prescribes, so that the NCUA receives the notification as soon as possible and no later than 72 hours after your organization reasonably believes it has experienced a reportable cyber incident.
Where the reportable cyber incident is a disruption of business operations or unauthorized access to sensitive data facilitated through, or caused by, a compromise of a credit union service organization, cloud service provider, or other third-party data hosting provider, or by a supply chain compromise, the NCUA must receive the notification within 72 hours of your organization being notified by the third party if that is sooner.
Send the notice as soon as practicable, but not later than 30 days, after becoming aware that unauthorized access to or use of customer information has occurred or is reasonably likely to have occurred, delaying it only for the period the United States Attorney General specifies where the Attorney General determines that notice poses a substantial risk to national security or public safety (17 CFR 248.30(a)(4)(iii)).
Maintain written policies and procedures reasonably designed to require oversight, including through due diligence and monitoring, of service providers, including that a service provider notify you as soon as possible, and no later than 72 hours, after becoming aware of a breach in security resulting in unauthorized access to a customer information system it maintains (17 CFR 248.30(a)(5)(i)).
Rapidly report a cyber incident to the Department of Defense within 72 hours of discovering it, at the Department's DIBNet portal (dibnet.dod.mil), using a DoD-approved medium assurance certificate that you must obtain before you need to file a report.
Make those policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that each service provider takes appropriate measures to protect against unauthorized access to or use of customer information, and to notify you as soon as possible, but no later than 72 hours after becoming aware that a breach in security has occurred resulting in unauthorized access to a customer information system the service provider maintains.
If your organization is an Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting company, determine, without unreasonable delay after you discover a cybersecurity incident, whether the incident is material, and if it is, file a Form 8-K under Item 1.05 within four business days after you make that determination.
If the information called for in Item 1.05 is not determined or is unavailable when you file, state that in the filing and file an amendment to the Form 8-K within four business days after you determine it or it becomes available.
After you reasonably determine that a breach of your customers' CPNI has occurred, electronically notify the United States Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation through the central reporting facility as soon as practicable, and in no event later than seven business days (47 CFR 64.2011(b)).
Do not notify customers or disclose the breach where the relevant investigating agency directs you in writing not to, for an initial period of up to 30 days that the agency may extend (47 CFR 64.2011(b)(3)).
If you are a vendor of personal health records (an entity that offers or maintains an electronic record of health information that can draw information from multiple sources and is managed, shared and controlled by or primarily for the individual) or a PHR related entity, notify each affected individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States, in plain language and without unreasonable delay, no later than 60 calendar days after you discover a breach of security of unsecured PHR identifiable health information.
Notify prominent media outlets serving a State or jurisdiction, without unreasonable delay and in no case later than 60 calendar days after you discover the breach, when the unsecured PHR identifiable health information of 500 or more of its residents is, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired during the breach.
If you are a third party service provider, notify the official designated in a written contract by the vendor of personal health records or PHR related entity you serve (or else a senior official of that vendor or entity), without unreasonable delay and in no case later than 60 calendar days after you discover the breach; identify each customer of that vendor or entity whose unsecured PHR identifiable health information has been, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired during the breach; and obtain acknowledgment that the notice was received.
Notify affected individuals without unreasonable delay and no later than 60 days after discovering a breach of unsecured protected health information.
For a breach of unsecured protected health information involving more than 500 residents of a State or jurisdiction, notify prominent media outlets serving that State or jurisdiction without unreasonable delay and in no case later than 60 calendar days after discovery of the breach.
If you are a business associate, notify the covered entity of a breach of unsecured protected health information without unreasonable delay and in no case later than 60 calendar days after discovery of the breach.
If your organization is a derivatives clearing organization, notify staff of the Division of Clearing and Risk promptly of any hardware or software malfunction, security incident, or targeted threat that materially impairs, or creates a significant likelihood of material impairment of, automated system operation, reliability, security, or capacity, and of any activation of your business continuity and disaster recovery plan.
If your organization is a designated contract market, notify Commission staff promptly of all cyber security incidents or targeted threats that actually or potentially jeopardize automated system operation, reliability, security, or capacity, as well as electronic trading halts and significant systems malfunctions and activations of your business continuity-disaster recovery plan.
If your organization is a swap execution facility, notify Commission staff promptly of all cyber security incidents or targeted threats that actually or potentially jeopardize automated system operation, reliability, security, or capacity, as well as electronic trading halts and material system malfunctions and activations of your business continuity-disaster recovery plan.
Evidence of sabotage, subversive activity, or an actual or threatened cyber incident involving or endangering any vessel, harbor, port, or waterfront facility must be reported immediately to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (for any cyber incident), and the Captain of the Port, or to their respective representatives.
Which of these one incident starts turns on the facts: the incident method works that through. The clocks document draws every clock in the LexLint law library on one axis, with the sentence beside every rung.
AIDrafted with AI
Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made
This page covers the instruments LexLint has researched
to a stage. Instruments named in the law library but not yet researched are
counted in the head and are not listed here. Every entry carries its own
primary source on its note page. This is a research index, not legal
advice.