As an attorney, Michael Price is used to reading fine print. But even he was surprised when he plugged in his new smart TV and saw a 46-page privacy policy.

As he combed through the legalese, one clause made him wonder if his new Samsung was perhaps a little bit too smart.

“Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party,” the screen said.

That clause persuaded Price to disconnect his TV’s Wi-Fi capability, effectively turning his smart TV into a dumb TV.

MBA BY THE BAY: See how an MBA could change your life with SFGATE's interactive directory of Bay Area programs.

“You shouldn’t have to make a choice between privacy and the benefits of modern technology,” said Price, staff counsel for the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University law school’s Brennan Center for Justice.

Personal privacy rights weren’t an issue with television sets before the rise of Internet-connected TVs in the past five years. But now there’s a pending California Assembly bill partly inspired by the same Orwellian warning that frightened Price.

Right to opt out

Assemblyman Mike Gatto, D-Los Angeles, authored the bill, which would force smart-TV makers to give customers the ability to opt out of features that could spy on their private conversations, particularly if it’s to help advertisers.

Although the bill narrowly focuses on smart TVs, it touches on a privacy debate that encompasses a wide array of Internet-enabled devices with recording and voice recognition features, from smart phones and game consoles to connected cars and Barbie dolls.

AB1116, which the Gatto-chaired Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee approved by an 11-0 vote last week, centers on smart TVs that can be controlled by speaking a command.

To keep improving those voice-control functions, Samsung tells customers its smart TVs can record conversations in the room and send them by the Internet to a third-party company, Nuance Communications. That speech recognition pioneer also provides the technology that powers services like Apple’s Siri.

Gatto worries that in the future, TVs could be turned into tools that determine what kinds of advertisements viewers see, based on the conversations the devices pick up.

“That type of thing crosses the line,” he said. “That’s why it’s important to draw the line.”

The thought is not so far-fetched considering Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Twitter and other online giants are already reaping billions of dollars in revenue from targeted ads based on words typed into Web searches, social media posts and tweets.

Gatto wonders what would happen if a couple discussed family finances while watching a smart TV and that information was transmitted to a third-party marketer.

“It’s a problem if the default on these televisions is to record everything,” he said. “It’s not just that you could be sent bankruptcy ads after you talk with your wife about financial problems while watching television, it’s what happens if someone hacks it.”

And what if a couple got intimate in a room with a smart TV?

“Those sounds, if you had your voice recognition on, is what would be included,” Gatto said. “That’s what’s disturbing about this.”

Gatto, who in an interview compared Samsung’s terms of service to a passage from the dystopian novel “1984,” wants to draw lines before smart TVs become more omnipresent in homes.

Not all have the same voice control functions, but TV makers including Samsung, LG, Sony, Philips and Panasonic have made smart TVs a central part of their product lineups.

Sales increasing

And according to a legislative analysis of the bill, worldwide smart TV sales are projected to increase from 45 million in 2011 to 141 million this year.

“Apparently we’ve become such a country where it’s too much of a hassle to use the remote control,” Gatto said. “People want to be able to say, 'Hey television, find me a movie starring Justin Bieber.’”

The bill would make it illegal for smart TVs to record, analyze or transmit words for reasons that are not essential for the voice-control function. It defines advertising and analysis of household conversations as nonessential functions.

Though the bill still has several hurdles in the Assembly, it has support on the Senate side from Sen. Ted Gaines, R-Rocklin (Placer County), who with Gatto announced they would push a package of consumer privacy protection acts, including controls on smart TV privacy.

In an e-mailed statement, a Samsung Electronics spokeswoman said the company supports the “commitment to consumer privacy” by Gatto and Gaines.

“We look forward to working with these policymakers as their important privacy bill moves through the legislative process,” the statement said. “Samsung takes consumer privacy very seriously and we are proud to offer consumers TVs that are designed with privacy in mind.”

Michael Petricone, senior vice president of government and regulatory affairs for the U.S. Consumer Electronics Association, said his industry trade group “has some concerns about the current version” of the bill.

“It’s important to understand that voice recognition not only drives the features behind innovative products and beneficial services such as smartphones and car navigation systems,” Petricone said in an e-mail. “It’s also a game-changing, accessibility innovation for people with disabilities.”

And, he said, more than just TVs are becoming smart.

“Manufacturers are working to help consumers understand how these connected systems work, inform them of the benefits and explain that consumers have the option and the power to disable their products’ voice command features,” he said. “Technology companies want to continue to earn and maintain consumers’ trust.”

But Lee Tien, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said privacy concerns are rising precisely because of these new devices.

“More and more devices in the home are capable of sensing or recording household activity,” he said in an e-mail. “That’s not to mention the power of smart meters and electrical usage data to make inferences about appliance use and human presence.”

Big Brother Barbie

Renate Samson, chief executive of privacy advocacy group Big Brother Watch of London, said she’s disturbed by toy maker Mattel’s plans to market an Internet-connected Barbie doll with voice recognition technology that can carry on a conversation with a child.

“It’s going to require more bills like Mr. Gatto’s bill to ensure companies take into account privacy rights at the start of research and development,” she said.

Even with Wi-Fi disabled on his new smart TV, Michael Price doesn’t feel like he’s missing out on much.

“I don’t really enjoy yelling at my television,” he said. “And as for getting access to Netflix, I have a little Apple TV that does just fine.”

Still, Price believes the technology behind smart TVs has lots of promise.

“You can get recommendations for television programs you might like,” he said. “I wouldn’t want to take that away. I don’t want to be discouraging people from buying these TVs or the manufacturers from making them.”

But customer privacy “shouldn’t be an afterthought,” he said.