Bill · H.R. 3875· House(119-HR-3875)
TERMS Act
- Introduced
- 6/10/2025
- Last activity
- 6/10/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Sponsored by
- Craig Goldman
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The TERMS Act requires online service providers to be more transparent about how they manage user accounts. It mandates that these providers disclose their acceptable use policies in clear, accessible language. Additionally, providers must give users written notice before suspending or terminating their accounts. The bill also requires companies to publish annual reports detailing their enforcement actions. These rules aim to help consumers make informed decisions and promote a competitive marketplace. Finally, the Federal Trade Commission is tasked with enforcing these requirements.
Yes· 3 of 8
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?+7
The bill establishes due process requirements for account suspensions and terminations.
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?+6
The bill enhances consumer protection by requiring transparency in account termination and providing advance notice to users.
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?+5
The bill increases regulation on online service providers regarding account management transparency.
The opposite
Would business owners be better off under this?-2
Online service providers face new compliance and reporting costs.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency: Online service providers must disclose their acceptable use policies in clear language, explaining what specific acts are prohibited and how they are enforced. (Section 4)
-
Informed Decision Making: By providing sufficient information regarding business standards and policies for account termination or suspension, consumers can make better choices about which services to use or purchase. (Section 2)
-
Advance Warning: Users are entitled to receive written notice at least 7 days before their account is restricted or terminated, which includes a description of the specific violation. (Section 5)
-
Due Process Options: The bill requires providers to explain how a user can appeal a decision to restrict them, or state clearly if such a decision cannot be appealed. (Section 4)
-
Accountability Through Reporting: Providers must publish an annual report detailing the number of restrictions, suspensions, and appeals, allowing for public oversight of their enforcement actions. (Section 6)
-
User Choice in Privacy: Users have the option to elect whether the written notice regarding their account restriction is publicly disclosed on the provider's website. (Section 5)
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Delayed Restrictions in Urgent Situations: A service provider can bypass the advance notice requirement if they are acting to comply with a court order or to protect against an imminent risk of death, serious physical injury, or serious health risk. (Section 5)
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Due Process+7Improves Government Transparency+4Increases Federal Power+3Improves Freedom Of Speech+2Improves Privacy Rights+2
- Education And Technology
- Increases Big Tech Regulation+5Improves Data Privacy+3
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Consumer Protection+6
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners-2
- 6/10/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Randy WeberRepublican · Texas