Hawaii 2025 Regular Session

Hawaii Senate Bill SB102

Introduced
1/15/25  
Refer
1/16/25  
Report Pass
2/10/25  
Refer
2/10/25  
Report Pass
2/28/25  
Engrossed
3/4/25  
Refer
3/6/25  
Report Pass
3/18/25  
Refer
3/18/25  
Report Pass
4/2/25  
Report Pass
4/24/25  
Report Pass
4/24/25  
Enrolled
5/1/25  
Chaptered
5/19/25  

Caption

Relating To Restaurants.

Impact

If passed, SB102 would amend Chapter 489J of the Hawaii Revised Statutes to create a framework that allows restaurants to legally protect their branding and reservation systems. It establishes penalties for third-party services that fail to comply, including civil actions that restaurant owners can pursue against violators. This legislation highlights the state's commitment to fostering a respectful and fair business environment, particularly for local restaurants that play a vital role in the state’s economy.

Summary

SB102 addresses issues arising from the unauthorized use of restaurant reservations by third-party reservation services. The bill seeks to mitigate the negative impact of misleading reservation listings on consumers and restaurant businesses. Specifically, it prohibits these services from advertising, promoting, or facilitating reservations without obtaining written consent from the respective restaurants. This measure aims to ensure that restaurants have control over their reservation processes and protects them from potential revenue loss due to unauthorized listings.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB102 appears to be generally positive among restaurant owners who support measures that protect their businesses from unfair competition. However, there may be contention from third-party reservation services who could view this legislation as an infringement on their operational abilities. The discussions likely reflect varying perspectives on what constitutes fair advertising and the responsibilities of third-party services versus the rights of restaurants.

Contention

While the bill seeks to protect local businesses, opponents may argue that it could stifle innovation and accessibility for consumers who rely on third-party platforms for reservations. There may also be concerns regarding the practicality of enforcing written agreements for each reservation, leading to potential disputes and misunderstandings. The proposed civil remedies could become a point of litigation, as restaurants may be incentivized to pursue legal action against third-party services that do not comply with the new requirements.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1302

Commercial cannabis billboards: placement restrictions.

CA AB436

Alcoholic beverages: tied-house restrictions: advertising: City of Napa.

CA SB162

Cannabis: marketing.

CA AB2580

Alcoholic beverages: tied-house restrictions: exceptions.

CA AB1294

Tied-house restrictions: advertising exceptions: County of Kings.

CA AB1323

Alcoholic beverage control: tied-house exceptions.

CA AB2899

Cannabis: advertisements.

CA AB2716

Cannabis: advertisements: highways.