Prez Signs Take It Down Act Targeting Explicit Pix
The bill passed Congress with overwhelming support so it is not surprising that the President signed it. The first lady was personally involved in getting the bill passed; she testified before Congress in favor of the bill.
The bill bans the NONCONSENSUAL online publication of sexually explicit images and videos, whether they are authentic or computer generated.
The bill requires websites to remove such media within 48 hours of requests from a victim, including attempting to take down copies.
There have been way too many victims of these activities including some who have committed suicide as a result.
The first lady watched the President sign the bill, one of the rare times she has been seen in public with him in his second term.
The President highlighted the bill in early March saying that he was going to use the bill for himself because “nobody gets treated worse that I do online”. I haven’t seen any sexually explicit images or videos of him online, so I assume he was kidding, but the point is valid – the bill will likely be abused like that.
What constitutes an intimate image? Is that one of those things that the Supremes are going to say they can’t define? The bill refers to an earlier law that attempts to define it this way. That seems pretty clear to me, but I am not a lawyer.
Section 1309 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (15 U.S.C. 6851) defines “intimate visual depiction” as a visual depiction (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256(5)) that shows an identifiable individual’s uncovered genitals, pubic area, anus, or post-pubescent female nipple, or the display or transfer of bodily sexual fluids on or from their body, or an identifiable individual engaging in sexually explicit conduct. This definition also includes visual depictions produced in public places if the individual did not voluntarily display the content or consent to the sexual conduct.
section 1309 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2022
The next question is how does an online service provider know that some person making a request is the person whose image/video is the one that is shown online? Not clear how you do that.
How does the online service provider know if it was consensual? You may remember that the first lady was a lingerie model before she was the first lady. There are many intimate visual depictions of her on the web. I assume those images were consensual since she was paid for them.
I assume that, like the copyright law, service providers will comply with any request they get since they don’t want to risk fines and potential criminal charges. In the grand scheme of things that might be okay unless the law gets abused. If the president follows through on what he said in March, if he says that some photo of him that he doesn’t like, like the one Republicans in Colorado commissioned and paid for a couple of years ago, is an intimate visual depiction, is that going to disappear off the Internet.
And finally, what about intimate images or videos that are hosted on servers in, say, China. I am sure that those web site operators will rush to comply with US law — not. Or, for that matter, images or videos that are hosted anywhere outside of the United States.
I think overall this bill is good, but how good is still a question. I hope that some people who have been really affected by malicious deepfake images (and this applies to actual images also) of themselves – and there are a lot of them – get some help as a result of the law.
The law is dependent on the FTC taking action against a web site, so that, potentially, is a problem also.
We shall see how well it is implemented.
Credit: NBC News
by 