Texas says ACR tracked what people watched without clear consent and used it to build ad profiles

Texas has reopened a fight that never really went away. It is about what your smart TV is allowed to collect about you inside your own home. Attorney General Ken Paxton filed lawsuits against Samsung, LG, Sony, Hisense, and TCL this week, accusing the companies of unlawfully collecting viewer data through automated content recognition, or ACR, without proper consent.

ACR is the part of the smart TV stack most people never hear about until a headline like this lands. In plain terms, it is technology that helps a TV recognise what is on screen. Companies and ad partners pitch it as a way to improve recommendations, understand what content is working, and serve more relevant ads. Paxton’s filings argue it crosses the line into surveillance when it runs without meaningful permission. His office describes ACR as an “uninvited” tracker, and in one of the complaints, he goes further, calling Samsung TVs “a mass surveillance system.”

The allegation at the centre of this case is not that your TV is shipping out your name and photos. It is that it can build a detailed behavioural record of what you watch across streaming apps, cable, and even devices connected over HDMI, then send that data back to the manufacturer and partners for profiling and ad targeting.

The lawsuits also include a claim designed to make readers sit up straight. Paxton alleges these systems can capture screen images as often as every 500 milliseconds and transmit viewing activity back to the company without the user’s knowledge or consent. The detail matters, because it frames ACR as something closer to continuous monitoring than a simple “this show is popular” signal.

Where this story gets messy, and familiar, is how consent is presented. In many smart TV setups, the choice is wrapped in friendly language about “personalised” experiences, better recommendations, and improved services. The lawsuits argue disclosures are hidden, vague, or misleading, and that opting in is easy while opting out takes real effort inside menus most people never open again.

Beyond advertising, Paxton also adds a geopolitical edge. He has flagged that TCL and Hisense are based in China, raising concerns about data access and government pressure. That framing is part of his public messaging around the suits, and it is clearly meant to widen the stakes beyond targeted ads.

None of this is happening in a vacuum. ACR has been controversial for years, and regulators have stepped in before. In 2017, Vizio paid $2.2 million to settle accusations tied to collecting viewing data without proper consent, a case that effectively put the industry on notice that “it was in the settings” is not a strong defence.

The companies named in the Texas lawsuits have largely responded the way big brands do when litigation is active. No comment, or a polite refusal to discuss pending legal matters. For now, the legal battle will revolve around what exactly was collected, how consent was obtained, and whether the disclosures and defaults meet the standard Texas law expects.

Whatever happens next, the useful takeaway for readers is immediate and mildly annoying. Check your TV settings. Look for anything that sounds like content recognition, viewing information, interest based ads, or viewing data services. Different brands use different labels, and some options are buried deeper than you would expect. Turning ACR off may reduce the relevance of ads and recommendations, but it can also reduce the amount of behaviour data your TV collects about what you watch.

This lawsuit wants to bring a big issue into the open. If your smart TV can follow what is on your screen, it should ask for clear permission. It should not be something you agree to by mistake during setup or only find later in settings.