AI Laws in Nottingham, New Hampshire
AI Laws USA tracks 18 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Nottingham, New Hampshire: 10+ federal rules, 7 New Hampshire state-level rules, and 1 local Nottingham ordinance. Coverage is strongest on automated decision-making, consumer protection, deepfakes, and AI-generated images. 7 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Nottingham local AI rules
1 local AI rule specific to Nottingham, New Hampshire.
-
Proposed / pending
Nottingham Planning Board pursuing a local data center morat
Nottingham, NH · Nottingham Planning Board pursuing a local data center moratorium
After backlash to a proposed warehouse-to-data-center conversion on Route 4, Nottingham's planning board held a June 3, 2026 workshop to move toward a local moratorium and regulation of data centers.
New Hampshire-level AI rules
7 New Hampshire state rules apply to residents and businesses in Nottingham. Sorted strongest first.
-
In effect Strength: limited
NH DOI AI Bulletin
NH · Effective February 20, 2024 · New Hampshire ID Docket INS 24-011-AB (2024-02-20)
The NH Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NH must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect Strength: limited
NH Consumer Privacy Act
New Hampshire · Effective January 1, 2025 · RSA 507-H (2024 NH SB 255)
New Hampshire residents can access, correct, delete, and port their personal data, and opt out of targeted advertising, data sales, and profiling used in solely automated decisions. Applies at low thresholds (35,000 residents), so it covers many businesses.
-
In effect Strength: limited
New Hampshire HB 1688 (state-agency AI limits)
New Hampshire · Effective July 1, 2024 · N.H. HB 1688 (2024), effective July 1, 2024
New Hampshire set rules for how state agencies may use artificial intelligence. Agencies may not use AI to classify people in ways that cause unlawful discrimination, and they may not use real-time or remote biometric identification such as facial recognition to surveil public spaces — except by law enforcement acting under a warrant. Agencies also may not use deepfakes for deceptive or malicious purposes. When an AI recommendation cannot be reversed once carried out, a qualified human must review it first, AI-generated content must be disclosed, and the public must be told when they are interacting with AI.
-
In effect Strength: limited
NH Deepfake Law (HB 1432)
New Hampshire · Effective January 1, 2025 · 2024 NH Laws ch. 243; RSA 638:26-a; RSA 507:8-n
New Hampshire makes it a Class B felony to knowingly create, distribute, or present a deepfake with intent to embarrass, harass, defame, extort, or cause financial or reputational harm — and it was the first state law to create a private right of action specifically for deepfake victims. Satire, parody, and news reporting are exempt.
-
In effect Strength: limited
NH Election Deepfake Law
New Hampshire · Effective August 1, 2024 · RSA 664:14-c (2024)
Prohibits distributing AI-generated deepfakes of candidates or election officials within 90 days of an election unless clearly disclosed as AI-manipulated. Depicted candidates can seek injunctions and damages.
-
In effect Strength: limited
New Hampshire HB 143 (AI chatbot child-safety)
New Hampshire · Effective January 1, 2026 · N.H. RSA ch. 270 (HB 143, 2025); RSA 270:1-270:2
New Hampshire targets AI chatbots whose sole purpose is open-ended generative conversation. An owner or operator of such a program may not knowingly direct a communication to a child that is intended to facilitate, encourage, solicit, or recommend that the child imminently engage in sexually explicit conduct, illegal drug or alcohol use, self-harm or suicide, or violence. A harmed child — or the child's parent or next friend — may sue for damages, with a minimum of $1,000 in liquidated damages per violation. The Attorney General may also bring an enforcement action.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Cease-and-Desist Order to Life Corporation over AI voice-clo
New Hampshire · Effective February 6, 2024 · Cease-and-Desist Order to Life Corporation over AI voice-clone voter-suppression robocalls
The NH Attorney General's Election Law Unit issued a cease-and-desist order to Life Corporation for AI-generated robocalls that cloned President Biden's voice to suppress votes in the 2024 primary, applying existing state voter-suppression law to deepfake audio.
Federal AI rules that apply in Nottingham, New Hampshire
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Nottingham, New Hampshire. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TVA data center capacity commitment charge (2026)
Tennessee Valley Authority · Effective October 1, 2026 · Tenn. Valley Auth. Bd. of Dirs. — Data Center Capacity Commitment Charge (approved Aug. 20, 2026; eff. Oct. 1, 2026)
The Tennessee Valley Authority's Board of Directors approved a separate, higher wholesale rate for data centers on August 20, 2026, effective October 1. New or expanding data center loads above 5 megawatts now fall under a Capacity Commitment Charge attached to TVA's data center rate schedules, designed to recover the incremental capacity costs those customers impose on the system. The headline figures are substantial: upfront capacity commitment charges of roughly $1.5 million per megawatt, payable over three to five years, and an all-in average billing increase for data center customers of about 10%, phased in across three consecutive fiscal years. The stated purpose is to keep residential rates low while still serving growing data center demand. TVA matters here out of proportion to a single utility. It is a federal corporate agency supplying power across seven states, so this is not a state rate case but a regional cost-allocation decision reaching a large share of the Southeast — and TVA is among the first large US utilities to adopt a tariff aimed specifically at AI-driven load. Where most 2026 measures in this dataset restrict where data centers may be built, this one changes what they pay to run.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Bartz v. Anthropic
N.D. Cal. · Effective September 5, 2025 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)
Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup ruled that training on lawfully purchased books was fair use. The piracy claims (LibGen ingestion) proceeded toward settlement; in September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement covering ~500,000 works. Judge Alsup granted preliminary approval September 25, 2025 and final approval July 20, 2026. The appeal period runs through August 19, 2026; class members will not receive payments until at least end of 2026.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)
United States · Effective June 23, 2025 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312
COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TAKE IT DOWN Act
United States · Effective May 19, 2025 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)
Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.
-
Blocked / in litigation
NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)
S.D. Ohio · Effective April 16, 2025 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 16, 2025)
Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was preliminarily enjoined on February 12, 2024, then permanently enjoined on April 16, 2025 when the district court granted summary judgment for NetChoice. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which vacated the district court's injunction in 2026.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)
D.C. Cir. · Effective March 18, 2025 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)
The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Louis v. SafeRent
D. Mass. · Effective November 20, 2024 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)
SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)
United States · Effective April 1, 2024 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017
The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC v. Rite Aid
FTC · Effective February 26, 2024 · FTC v. Rite Aid Corp., No. 2:23-cv-05023 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 19, 2023)
The FTC banned Rite Aid from using facial-recognition technology in its stores for five years after finding the pharmacy chain's FRT system falsely tagged customers — disproportionately women and people of color — as shoplifters, leading to wrongful detentions and humiliations.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TCPA (AI voice calls)
United States · Effective February 8, 2024 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17
Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.
Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Nottingham, New Hampshire
Are there AI laws in Nottingham, New Hampshire?
What federal AI rules apply in Nottingham?
Does New Hampshire have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in New Hampshire?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Nottingham?
How do I report an AI law violation in Nottingham?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Nottingham?
Is Nottingham regulated by New Hampshire's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Nottingham?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Nottingham ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email feedback@ailawsusa.com or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.