>>22690399According to
congress.gov the bill is not yet law.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/146/textExcerpts of the official summary provided by the Congressional Research Service.
>This bill generally prohibits the nonconsensual online publication of intimate visual depictions of individuals, both authentic and computer-generated, and requires certain online platforms to promptly remove such depictions upon receiving notice of their existence.Promptly = within 48 hours
>Violators are subject to mandatory restitution and criminal penalties, including prison, a fine, or both. Threats to publish [...] are similarly prohibited under the bill and subject to criminal penalties.The Electronic Frontier Foundation among many others are opposed to the bill.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/02/take-it-down-act-flawed-attempt-protect-victims-will-lead-censorshiphttps://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/04/congress-passes-take-it-down-act-despite-major-flawsThey raise a number of criticisms, such as openness for abuse...
>TAKE IT DOWN creates a far broader internet censorship regime than the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which has been widely abused to censor legitimate speech. But at least the DMCA has an anti-abuse provision and protects services from copyright claims should they comply. This bill contains none of those minimal speech protections and essentially greenlights misuse of its takedown regime....threatening users' privacy...
>Platforms may respond by abandoning encryption entirely in order to be able to monitor content—turning private conversations into surveilled spaces.>In fact, victims of NCII often rely on encryption for safety—to communicate with advocates they trust, store evidence, or escape abusive situations. The bill’s failure to protect encrypted communications could harm the very people it claims to help....and noting that existing laws already cover NCII: defamation, harassment, extortion, and so on.
