Michael Disabato, a wireless analyst at Burton Group in Midvale, Utah, said he doesn't have any problem with basic authentication services at a hot spot; it's the bill's data-logging requirement that upsets him.

He described it as overly broad and ill-defined and said it might even put home Wi-Fi users in legal jeopardy if their Wi-Fi signal is open.

"People like me are going to start a grass-roots movement to whoever proposed that law to get them removed from office," said Disabato. There are already laws in place that allow legal authorities to tap and capture traffic from certain data streams, he said.

As for the broader issues raised by the bill, James Brehm, a mobile and wireless analyst at Frost & Sullivan Ltd., said it will raise many issues and require costly changes, such as increased storage and changes in network architectures to store and capture the data. Other issues, such as how any collected data would be protected, must also be addressed.

And there are potential cost issues. Brehm said he's not certain what the legislation would cost to implement, but it would "be big."