Notice and Removal of Nonconsensual Intimate Visual Depictions
Section 3 · Sec. 3 ·
What this chapter is about
This part tells web sites what to do. A person can ask them to take a private image down. The site must take it down fast. The FTC can act if a site does not.
The document says “shall”Who acts: covered platformsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, a covered platform shall establish a process whereby an identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual) may-- (i) notify the covered platform of an intimate visual depiction published on the covered platform”
The first duty in the section. Within one year of enactment, which the Act's approval line dates to May 19, 2025, a covered platform must establish a process by which an identifiable individual, or an authorized person acting for them, can both notify the platform of an intimate visual depiction published there without their consent and request its removal.
What the document actually says
“Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, a covered platform shall establish a process whereby an identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual) may-- (i) notify the covered platform of an intimate visual depiction published on the covered platform”
That sentence, in plain words
Web sites have one year to set this up. A person can point to a private image of them. They can ask the site to take it down.
What this is about
The year runs from the day the law was signed. That day was May 19, 2025. A helper can make the ask for the person.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: identifiable individualsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“A notification and request for removal of an intimate visual depiction submitted under the process established under subparagraph (A) shall include, in writing-- (i) a physical or electronic signature of the identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual);”
What a request submitted through that process must contain. It must be in writing and carry a physical or electronic signature of the individual or of an authorized person acting for them. It must also identify the depiction, with information sufficient for the platform to locate it, and give information sufficient for the platform to make contact.
What the document actually says
“A notification and request for removal of an intimate visual depiction submitted under the process established under subparagraph (A) shall include, in writing-- (i) a physical or electronic signature of the identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual);”
That sentence, in plain words
The ask must be in writing. It must be signed. The name can be typed or written by hand.
What this is about
The ask must say where to find the image. It must give a way to reach the person.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: identifiable individualsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“(iii) a brief statement that the identifiable individual has a good faith belief that any intimate visual depiction identified under clause (ii) is not consensual, including any relevant information for the covered platform to determine the intimate visual depiction was published without the consent of the identifiable individual;”
The third of the four things a request must include. The individual must give a brief statement of a good faith belief that the depiction identified is not consensual, and include any information relevant to the platform's determination that it was published without consent.
What the document actually says
“(iii) a brief statement that the identifiable individual has a good faith belief that any intimate visual depiction identified under clause (ii) is not consensual, including any relevant information for the covered platform to determine the intimate visual depiction was published without the consent of the identifiable individual;”
That sentence, in plain words
The person must say they think the image went up without a yes. They must mean it.
What this is about
They should add what they know that shows this. That helps the site check.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: covered platformsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“A covered platform shall provide on the platform a clear and conspicuous notice, which may be provided through a clear and conspicuous link to another web page or disclosure, of the notice and removal process established under paragraph (1)(A) that-- (A) is easy to read and in plain language;”
The platform must carry a clear and conspicuous notice of the process, which it may provide through a clear and conspicuous link to another page or disclosure. The notice must be easy to read and in plain language, and must give information about the platform's responsibilities under the section, including how an individual can submit a request.
What the document actually says
“A covered platform shall provide on the platform a clear and conspicuous notice, which may be provided through a clear and conspicuous link to another web page or disclosure, of the notice and removal process established under paragraph (1)(A) that-- (A) is easy to read and in plain language;”
That sentence, in plain words
The site must post a clear notice about how this works. It must be easy to read.
What this is about
The notice can sit on another page. A clear link to it is enough. It must say what the site has to do.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: covered platformsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“Upon receiving a valid removal request from an identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual) using the process described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii), a covered platform shall, as soon as possible, but not later than 48 hours after receiving such request-- (A) remove the intimate visual depiction; and (B) make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies of such depiction.”
The deadline the section sets. On receiving a valid removal request through the established process, a covered platform must remove the depiction as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the request, and must make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies.
What the document actually says
“Upon receiving a valid removal request from an identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual) using the process described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii), a covered platform shall, as soon as possible, but not later than 48 hours after receiving such request-- (A) remove the intimate visual depiction; and (B) make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies of such depiction.”
That sentence, in plain words
Once a good ask comes in, the site has 48 hours. It must take the image down.
What this is about
48 hours is two days. The site must also look for copies it knows of. It must take those down too.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: covered platformsHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“A covered platform shall not be liable for any claim based on the covered platform's good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material claimed to be a nonconsensual intimate visual depiction based on facts or circumstances from which the unlawful publishing of an intimate visual depiction is apparent, regardless of whether the intimate visual depiction is ultimately determined to be unlawful or not.”
The section shields a covered platform from any claim based on its good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material claimed to be a nonconsensual intimate visual depiction, where the unlawful publishing is apparent from the facts or circumstances. The shield holds whether or not the depiction is finally determined to be unlawful.
What the document actually says
“A covered platform shall not be liable for any claim based on the covered platform's good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material claimed to be a nonconsensual intimate visual depiction based on facts or circumstances from which the unlawful publishing of an intimate visual depiction is apparent, regardless of whether the intimate visual depiction is ultimately determined to be unlawful or not.”
That sentence, in plain words
A site that takes an image down in good faith cannot be sued for it.
What this is about
This holds even if the image turns out to be legal. What counts is that the site acted honestly.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Federal Trade CommissionHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“A failure to reasonably comply with the notice and takedown obligations under subsection (a) shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or a deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).”
How the duties in subsection (a) are enforced. A failure to reasonably comply is treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. That Act is cited, not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“A failure to reasonably comply with the notice and takedown obligations under subsection (a) shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or a deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).”
That sentence, in plain words
A site that does not follow these rules breaks a trade rule.
What this is about
The FTC guards trade rules. Breaking one lets the FTC step in.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Federal Trade CommissionHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section.”
The Federal Trade Commission enforces the section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers and duties as if the applicable provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were part of it. That Act is cited, not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“the Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
The FTC runs this part. It uses the same powers it uses for its own law.
What this is about
The FTC is the Federal Trade Commission. This site has not indexed the law that gives it those powers.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Federal Trade CommissionHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“Any person who violates this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).”
A person who violates the section is subject to the penalties of the Federal Trade Commission Act and entitled to its privileges and immunities. Those penalties, privileges and immunities are in a statute cited here and not indexed.
What the document actually says
“Any person who violates this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).”
That sentence, in plain words
A person who breaks this part faces the trade law penalties. They get its protections too.
What this is about
Those rules come from the law that set up the FTC. This site has not indexed that law.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not be construed”Who acts: Federal Trade CommissionHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the authority of the Federal Trade Commission under any other provision of law.”
The Act is not to be read as limiting the authority the Federal Trade Commission holds under any other provision of law. The clause reaches the whole Act, not only this section.
What the document actually says
“Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the authority of the Federal Trade Commission under any other provision of law.”
That sentence, in plain words
This law does not cut back what the FTC can already do.
What this is about
The FTC has other powers under other laws. Those stay in place.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Federal Trade CommissionHow: statuteSec. 3 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Commission shall also enforce this section in the same manner provided in subparagraph (A), with respect to organizations that are not organized to carry on business for their own profit or that of their members.”
The section extends the Commission's enforcement to organizations that are not organized to carry on business for their own profit or that of their members. It does so notwithstanding sections 4, 5(a)(2) and 6 of the Federal Trade Commission Act or any jurisdictional limitation of the Commission. Those provisions are cited, not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“the Commission shall also enforce this section in the same manner provided in subparagraph (A), with respect to organizations that are not organized to carry on business for their own profit or that of their members.”
That sentence, in plain words
The FTC can also act against groups that do not run for profit.
What this is about
The law names some limits on what the FTC can reach. This part says those limits do not block it here.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each duty subsection (a) places on a covered platform, and each grant of enforcement power to the Federal Trade Commission in subsection (b).
The section is written directly rather than as an amendment, so there is no mechanical amendment layer to leave out. Nothing in the section is omitted here.
The section places its duties on a covered platform but does not define the term: that definition is in section 4 of this Act. The Federal Trade Commission Act is cited throughout subsection (b) and is not indexed here, so nothing recorded says what powers, penalties or immunities it carries. The regulation defining broadband internet access service is likewise cited elsewhere in the Act and not indexed.
