SB 44 allows South Dakota's Attorney General to obtain business records from internet and telecom providers during criminal investigations of internet crimes against children or human trafficking. It requires judicial approval based on "reasonable cause" before issuing subpoenas for specific records like IP addresses, account details, and device information. Hughes County judges have statewide authority to approve these subpoenas, which cannot notify account holders, and obtained records must be used solely for law enforcement with privacy safeguards. The bill directly affects providers (including internet and telecom companies) by mandating compliance with court-ordered requests for targeted data.
SB 135 requires data center operators to pay all electricity costs associated with their facilities, preventing utilities from raising residential rates to cover these expenses (Section 3). It also prohibits tax exemptions for data centers (Section 5) and ensures local governments retain authority to regulate data center development (Section 4). The bill mandates data centers to report projected water usage to local providers and the Board of Water Management before operation, with annual reports on actual consumption (Sections 6-7), ensuring water allocation prioritizes residential and essential services. This directly affects data center operators, utilities, and South Dakota residents by limiting cost-shifting and protecting local resource management.
SB 111 requires social media companies operating in South Dakota to give users access to their collected personal data upon request and maintain transparent, publicly available technical standards (open protocols) that allow different social media platforms to share user data. It directly affects social media companies by mandating data access for users and requiring interoperability interfaces that are free from licensing fees or patent restrictions. Key provisions define "personal data" as information linked to an identifiable individual (excluding de-identified or public data) and specify that interoperability must enable data exchange between platforms via open protocols. The bill focuses on concrete policy changes: user data access and standardized data-sharing mechanisms, without specifying enforcement or penalties.
SB 110 requires broadband internet providers in South Dakota to obtain explicit customer permission ("opt-in consent") before using, sharing, or selling most types of personal customer data, including location, health details, device identifiers, and financial information. It directly affects broadband service providers (like local internet companies) and their customers by mandating clear consent mechanisms that are easy to understand and use. Key provisions include prohibiting providers from charging higher prices or denying service based on a customer’s refusal to consent, and requiring that consent requests be conspicuous, non-misleading, and available at no extra cost. The law applies specifically to "broadband internet access service providers" as defined in the bill, covering data collected through the customer-provider relationship.
HB 1054 repeals the creation and budgeting requirements for South Dakota's Digital Dakota Network. The bill removes specific statutory provisions that established the network's structure, budgeting process, and the separate Office of Digital Dakota Network within the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications. It transfers all remaining network-related functions - including management, programming, and budgeting - directly to the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications. This change eliminates the network as a distinct program and ends the requirement for the Bureau to submit separate budgets for it. The bill directly affects the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications, which will now manage all telecommunications network operations under existing authority.
HB 1155 amends South Dakota's investment rules to allow the state to allocate up to 10% of its investment funds into Bitcoin. The bill specifically defines Bitcoin as a digital asset meeting strict network criteria (starting from its 2009 genesis block) and requires all Bitcoin holdings to be stored through secure custody solutions or qualified custodians. It applies only to state investment funds, not individual citizens or private entities, and explicitly prohibits investments in other digital assets like cryptocurrency exchanges. The bill does not authorize new spending but modifies existing investment guidelines to include Bitcoin under defined security and limit requirements.
