Let’s Talk About Utah

Utah has had a lot of firsts lately. The Beehive State recently became the first state to ban both fluoride in its drinking water and LGBTQ+ pride flags in its schools. And while it is interesting (if we’re being polite) to see a state legislature hold a grudge against cavity-free teeth and queer kids, there is another much more interesting first-of-its-kind law passed in Utah this year that hasn’t gotten nearly as much attention.

That would be the rather dry sounding Data Sharing Amendments bill. And while Utah’s Governor Spencer Cox didn’t actually sign the pride flag ban bill into law (he still let it become law, just without his signature) he was pretty stoked to sign the Data Sharing Amendments bill into law. In fact, Utah’s Governor called it his favorite bill of 2025, going so far as to claim it will “change the world” because it “may be the most important thing we’ve done for a generation.” Take that fluoride!

Why are we here at DTI talking about a Utah data sharing bill? Because one of the things going on in this Utah law is a push for data portability for social media platforms. A quick reminder: the basic idea behind data portability is that when you use an internet service or platform – like Facebook, Google Photos, Spotify, or Replika AI – you put your data into those services and you should be able to safely get it back out in a useable way that benefits you, not just the company. Think about your social posts, photos, music playlists, or all that information your AI girlfriend knows about you. That exists as data the company holds as a business asset and uses to provide the service, and to make money of course. But what if you want to transfer that data to another service because it offers something better – better privacy and security, better ethics as a company, a better product or service? Well, that’s not always easily done right now.

This is the premise behind the Utah law’s inclusion of data portability. Here it would also be good to note that Utah’s new law also includes requirements about this other very important thing called data interoperability. Data portability means someone can ask the app or service to transfer their personal data. Data interoperability is about requirements that companies should put in place so that users can share and synchronize a common set of their personal data between social media services.

One of the most interesting things about Utah’s law is who supports it, who opposes it, and who is absent from the conversation. (Note: I’ve included a pretty comprehensive reading list below if you want to dig deeper into what was said and written about Utah’s noteworthy legislation).

Who supports this bill? The sponsor is Representative Doug Fiefia (R), who says he spent 10 years working in the tech industry and saw how these companies operate (watch Rep Fiefia’s opening statement on his bill). And Utah Governor Spencer Cox (R), whose stance is that Big Tech needs to be reigned in to help protect the children. There’s also Project Liberty, a Washington DC-based organization founded by the former owner of the LA Dodgers whose stated goal is to “help people take back control of their digital lives” and who wants to see the protections in the Utah bill implemented nationwide. Jonathan Haidt, author of a book called “The Anxious Generation” wrote an op-ed in support of the Utah bill, saying it was needed to protect kids from online harm. And perhaps my favorite supporter of the bill was a small app maker named Joel – the ex-husband of a Utah state lobbyist (don’t worry, they’re still friends) – who testified in a hearing that making it easier for people to transfer their data would help little app developers like him compete with the big guys.

The people who opposed this bill are also pretty interesting. A fellow with the conservative leaning Washington DC based think tank American Enterprise Institute wrote an Op-Ed in a popular Utah newspaper opposing the bill arguing that it would be bad for privacy. The Libertas Institute, a Utah-based libertarian leaning group whose list of policy wins includes decriminalizing polygamy and banning police quotas for arrests or citations, also opposed the bill citing privacy concerns. And the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which includes some of the biggest tech companies, wrote a letter asking Utah’s Governor to veto the bill, again citing privacy concerns. Although, my favorite opposition to the bill might have come from the one Utah Senator who spoke out against the bill: Senator John Johnson. Senator Johnson questioned the bill citing his worry that it could harm his ability to microtarget people online during his next election campaign. Seriously.

In all the discussions I found on the Utah bill, voices from the policymakers, tech companies, think tank thinkers, and small app makers were there. The one group missing from the conversation was us, the consumers and users of all these tech products and services. In all the hearings, op-eds, and letters of support or opposition I came across on this bill, I only saw one person who seemed to be an average citizen speak up. His name was Wesley and what he had to say drove home that he didn’t feel like he was in control of his data.

Which is a good reminder that data portability is kinda the Cinderella before the ball of data rights. Just look at the EU. They have a famous data protection regulation called GDPR. It grants EU citizens a set of data rights. Things like the right to access your data, the right to delete it, and yes, the right to transfer your data from one service to another. But even in the EU under GDPR, experts have noted data portability is the least used and invested in data right.

Here in the US, California, Colorado, and a few other states have also passed bills with some of the same digital rights as GDPR, even if there are significant gaps (looking at you, Congress!). Utah also had some data portability obligations in an existing law, which this bill updated. It did that by explicitly including the user’s “social graph” (data about who you are connected to). It also changed the approach to data portability from simply stating it as a consumer right, to making it a specific obligation that social media companies must provide.

Why aren’t more consumers asking for better data portability? Being able to seamlessly, easily, switch services and transfer all your data to the new service sounds like a total game changer. You can leave the service with the bad privacy habits, the crappy CEO behavior, the bad functionality and go to a better place that works for you. And if you don’t like it, you can transfer back or find another, better service. You won’t be locked into something you don’t want and it won’t require a computer science degree to move your stuff elsewhere. Vote with your dollars (or your data in this case). This all sounds great! So why aren’t consumers demanding it?

Probably because we consumers just don’t know much about it. And we certainly don’t have an expectation that really good data portability should be our right. Over the past couple of months as I’ve been thinking more and more about data portability as a right, I keep asking people I run into what they think. The biggest response I’ve gotten by far has been, “Huh, I guess I never even thought I should be able to do that.” We’re so used to being caught in our walled gardens and sticking with the services we’ve been using for years because it’s convenient or feels like our only option. Even as we’ve grown frustrated, annoyed, or downright angry at some of those same services for not protecting our privacy, not being ethical companies, or no longer offering the quality of service we want.

Time will tell if and how the Utah bill is implemented and what effects it will have on those of us who use social media. The bill supporters expect legal challenges from the companies it most impacts. No matter what, we expect to see more legislation like this, in more states, but hopefully with much more public engagement. As consumers, we should expect good data portability as a right. We deserve to be able to take our personal data where we want, when we want, safely and in a way that works for us. The rules are being written, and our voices must be there to make sure they are written with our best interests in mind.

####

Utah Bill Reading List

News Articles

Utah legislators take a stand against social media exploitation – Deseret News

Utah’s latest data and social media laws could ‘change the world,’ Gov. Cox says – Utah News Dispatch

A Utah representative’s bold move to rein in Big Tech – Deseret News

Utah Data Sharing Law Creates Path to Upend Social Media Model – Bloomberg Law

Op-Eds

Social Media Platforms Shouldn’t Own Your Identity – Time

Opinion: Why Utah’s ‘simple’ social media reform could set a dangerous privacy precedent – Deseret News

Opinion: Utah families deserve choices for safer online experiences – Deseret News

Bill Text and Legislative History