Texas Files Suit Against Smart TV Makers Over Spying Features

Back in October, I started a video series looking at “Automatic Content Recognition” (ACR) which is a technology that modern smart televisions use to collect data about what people are watching. The televisions take actual visual and audio snapshots of what is on the screen several times a second.

In my latest video on this topic, I look at a new set of lawsuits filed by the Texas Attorney General against five major TV manufacturers—Sony, Samsung, LG, Hisense, and TCL—over their use of this technology. The Texas AG even scored an early victory, requiring Hisense to turn off their ACR systems for Texas residents.

The lawsuits were all filed in a Texas state court, which means any outcomes would apply only to Texas residents. Still, they offer a detailed look at how this technology works and how aggressively it is being deployed.

The frequency of ACR sampling varies by manufacturer and model, but in some cases the sampling happens multiple times per second. That information is converted into a digital fingerprint and sent to a remote server, where it is matched against a massive database of media. Once identified, the viewing data can be sold to advertisers and data brokers.

As I noted in my earlier videos, ACR can also analyze anything coming into the television through HDMI, including cable boxes, streaming devices, and video game consoles. The lawsuits allege that video games are a big area of data collection for TV manufacturers and data brokers, which raises questions about whether they are illegally capturing data from children under the age of 13.

Marketing materials cited by the Texas Attorney General in the lawsuits suggest that some companies use this data to track users across devices and platforms, following them from their TV screens to social media sites and other parts of the internet. In one example cited in the filings, LG is accused of collecting screen data as frequently as every 10 milliseconds and building detailed consumer profiles that may include political interests, religious viewing habits, and other personal characteristics.

Another major issue raised in the lawsuits is informed consent when users are asked to opt into these features. While most smart TVs technically require users to opt in before data collection begins, the Attorney General argues that the process is designed to push users toward agreement. Opting in is often a single click, while opting out can require navigating dozens of menu options spread across multiple screens. In some cases, declining data collection disables core smart TV features altogether, effectively forcing users to choose between privacy and functionality. Screens shown in the lawsuits for brands like TCL and Hisense often lack a clear “disagree” option, while others rely on confusing layouts that make refusal unintuitive.

Samsung is also accused of misleading customers by claiming it does not collect video or screen content. The state argues that even if the company only transmits hashed fingerprints rather than raw images, the end result is the same because the system can still identify exactly what is being watched.

The Attorney General is seeking jury trials, civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation, and additional restraining orders against the manufacturers. Beyond the legal details, the lawsuits highlight how valuable viewing data has become. It helps explain how large televisions can be sold so cheaply: the hardware is often subsidized by ongoing data collection.

For viewers who are concerned about this practice, the most reliable option remains disconnecting the television from the internet entirely and using an Apple TV that has stronger privacy controls. Even then, avoiding tracking altogether is difficult, but these cases shed light on just how much data smart TVs can collect—and how little most users may realize about what is happening in the background.

I’ll continue watching how these lawsuits develop, since they may signal whether other states are willing to challenge an industry practice that has largely operated out of public view until now.