LG smart TVs have been collecting household viewing data through automated content recognition technology without sufficient user consent, according to litigation and regulatory settlements in 2026. The Texas Attorney General secured an agreement from LG in May 2026 requiring the company to stop using its ACR (Automated Content Recognition) system to gather viewing data without explicit informed consent. LG’s technology was capturing fingerprints of everything displayed on its smart TVs—television shows, movies, advertisements, games from connected consoles, cable boxes, and even content from laptops connected via HDMI—every 15 seconds, then transmitting that data without users’ clear knowledge or agreement.
The settlement came after a broader investigation into smart TV manufacturers’ data collection practices. Federal litigation is also proceeding, with a law firm alleging that LG forced consumers to accept new privacy policies as a condition of using their televisions, threatening to disable core features for those who refused. Beyond Texas, ongoing cases against other manufacturers including Sony, TCL, and Hisense suggest this issue extends across the smart TV industry.
Table of Contents
- What Is ACR and Why LG Used It on Smart TVs
- The Texas Settlement and What LG Must Now Do
- The Federal Class Action Investigation and Forced Privacy Updates
- How to Protect Yourself if You Own an LG Smart TV
- The Broader Investigation Into Multiple TV Manufacturers
- Understanding ACR Data and What Leaves Your Home
- The Broader Pattern Across Smart Device Manufacturers
What Is ACR and Why LG Used It on Smart TVs
Automated Content Recognition is a fingerprinting technology that identifies what’s playing on a television screen at any given moment. Unlike traditional data collection that requires explicit logins or user actions, ACR runs invisibly in the background, capturing a digital signature of the on-screen content every 15 seconds. For LG, this meant the technology identified not just what viewers watched on LG’s proprietary smart TV interface, but also content from external sources—cable boxes, streaming devices, gaming consoles, and computers connected via HDMI. The stated purpose of ACR is ostensibly market research and targeted advertising. Networks, advertisers, and streaming services have historically used this data to understand viewing habits, measure audience engagement, and fine-tune ad targeting.
However, the collection works entirely without the viewer’s ongoing awareness or participation. A person could watch cable television from a third-party cable box or play a video game on an external console, never interact with LG’s software, and still have that activity recorded and transmitted by the television set itself. Comparison to samsung‘s approach is instructive. Samsung’s ACR system captured screenshots every 500 milliseconds—twice as frequently as LG’s 15-second interval—and transmitted viewing activity data without users’ knowledge. Samsung settled with Texas in March 2026 for $2.8 million over the same practice. Both manufacturers’ systems operated silently, with users having no direct way to know their viewing was being monitored, classified, and transmitted unless they specifically investigated their television’s privacy settings.
The Texas Settlement and What LG Must Now Do
On May 11, 2026, LG reached an agreement with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to stop using ACR data collection without informed consent. The settlement requires LG to make three significant changes: first, display a pop-up disclosure on smart televisions explaining how viewing data may be collected and used; second, update privacy disclosures on LG’s website; and third, provide users with a clear, simple option to opt out of viewing data collection. These aren’t optional features—they’re enforceable terms of the agreement. Critically, the settlement also requires LG to prohibit transfers of viewing data to the Chinese Communist Party and to prevent unlawful international data transfers more broadly. This provision addresses concerns that went beyond simple privacy invasion.
The implication in the Attorney General’s language is that LG’s data collection and sharing practices may have exposed sensitive information about American households’ viewing habits and device usage patterns to foreign government access, a concern that emerged during the investigation. one important limitation of this settlement is that LG admits no liability or wrongdoing. This is standard language in many regulatory settlements, but it means the company avoids an admission that its prior practices were illegal or harmful. Additionally, the Texas agreement applies specifically to Texas residents and LG devices sold in Texas. Consumers in other states may have different protections depending on their state’s privacy laws and whether additional litigation or enforcement actions occur in their jurisdictions.
The Federal Class Action Investigation and Forced Privacy Updates
Beyond the Texas settlement, the law firm Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP has been investigating a separate federal class action against LG. This investigation alleges that LG smart TVs require owners to agree to new or updated privacy policies that authorize extensive tracking of viewing habits and data sharing with third parties. The distinguishing factor here is the allegation of coercion: consumers who reject these updated terms reportedly risk losing access to core smart TV features. This “feature degradation” concern is significant and affects the practical reality of owning an LG smart TV.
If a user declines to consent to the new privacy terms, the television may become less functional—streaming apps might not work, on-screen menus might become limited, or other essential features could be disabled. This creates a situation where true informed consent becomes meaningless; users are forced to choose between accepting tracking or accepting a diminished product. It’s the difference between choosing not to install a software update and being pressured into privacy concessions through technological lockout. The status of this federal investigation remains ongoing as of mid-2026, and class certification has not yet been granted, meaning it remains unclear whether a class action lawsuit will ultimately proceed or reach settlement. Affected consumers should watch for updates from the law firm directly.
How to Protect Yourself if You Own an LG Smart TV
For LG smart TV owners in Texas, the May 2026 settlement means that updated privacy controls should now be available on your device. To exercise your rights under the settlement, look for privacy settings in your LG smart TV’s menu system—typically found under Settings > Privacy or similar menu paths. LG’s updated disclosure should now inform you that ACR is collecting viewing data and should provide an opt-out option that actually disables the collection. For owners outside Texas, check your television’s privacy settings regardless.
Some LG models may have rolled out similar controls even in non-Texas markets, or your state may have its own privacy laws that provide comparable protections. If you own an LG smart TV, you can also visit LG’s official website at lg.com/us/arbitration to review their current privacy disclosures and understand what data collection practices are active on your specific model. The practical tradeoff to understand is that opting out of ACR may affect certain features. Some streaming apps or services might be optimized for viewers whose devices send engagement data, and disabling ACR could theoretically affect recommendations or service responsiveness—though this connection is not guaranteed. The benefit, however, is clear: your household’s viewing data is no longer being collected and potentially shared with third parties, including internationally.
The Broader Investigation Into Multiple TV Manufacturers
The Texas Attorney General’s investigation extends far beyond LG. In December 2025, Paxton’s office filed lawsuit against five television manufacturers: Samsung, LG, Sony, TCL, and Hisense. The lawsuit accused these companies of “spying on Texans” by using ACR and similar technologies without adequate consent. As of June 2026, the situation with each manufacturer differs significantly. Samsung settled in March 2026, agreeing to pay $2.8 million and, like LG, to stop using ACR without express consent and to update its privacy disclosures. The remaining three manufacturers—Sony, TCL, and Hisense—have not yet reached settlements.
Their cases continue to proceed, meaning the litigation landscape for smart TV privacy is still actively developing. If you own a television from any of these brands, similar requirements for opt-out mechanisms and clearer privacy disclosures may eventually be mandated in Texas and could influence practices in other states as well. A significant warning here is that settlement with one state’s attorney general does not automatically protect consumers in other states. The LG and Samsung Texas settlements apply to Texas. California, New York, and other states with strong privacy laws may pursue their own enforcement actions or consumers in those states may organize their own class actions. The evolution of this issue is ongoing, and the standards being established in Texas may become the floor for what’s expected nationwide.
Understanding ACR Data and What Leaves Your Home
When ACR collects viewing data from your smart TV, it’s not recording video. Instead, it creates a digital fingerprint—a unique identifier—of the content displayed on your screen at that moment. This fingerprint is then matched against a database to identify what you were watching. However, this fingerprint still represents intimate information about your household.
If your television captures that you watched a particular movie, played a specific video game, viewed a certain news channel, or watched a health-related documentary at 2 a.m., that information could be correlated with your identity if combined with other data. The data that leaves your home via ACR goes to third parties. LG’s agreements to prevent “unlawful” data transfers and specifically to block transfers to the Chinese Communist Party suggest that, previously, some level of international data sharing was occurring. Even domestically, viewing data can be sold to data brokers, advertisers, and market research firms. This means your household’s viewing habits could influence targeted ads you see on websites, contribute to demographic profiles built about you, or feed into algorithmic systems that predict your behavior or preferences.
The Broader Pattern Across Smart Device Manufacturers
The smart TV privacy issue is not unique to LG or Samsung, nor is it limited to one investigation or settlement. This pattern reflects a broader business model where connected consumer devices collect behavioral data as a secondary revenue stream. Smart televisions, smart speakers, smart home systems, and other connected devices often generate more value for manufacturers through data collection and sale than through the sale of the physical hardware itself.
What makes the LG situation notable is that it involved entirely passive collection—ACR worked whether users knew about it or not and regardless of whether they actively used LG’s own services. Consumers connecting external devices to an LG television via HDMI had no expectation that the television itself was identifying and reporting on their content consumption. The settlements and ongoing litigation in 2026 represent a pushback against this hidden data extraction model, establishing that manufacturers must provide informed consent, clear opt-out mechanisms, and transparency about what data leaves the home and where it goes.
You Might Also Like
- Roku Privacy Class Action Claims Smart TV Viewing Data Was Shared Improperly
- Vizio Smart TV Privacy Class Action Claims Viewing Data Was Used for Advertising
- Venmo Privacy Class Action Claims User Transaction Data Was Shared Improperly
Open Settlements You Can Claim Now
Browse current class action settlements accepting claims — several require no proof of purchase: