Privacy and digital rights advocates are elevating alarms over a regulation that many would anticipate them to cheer: a federal crackdown on revenge porn and AI-generated deepfakes.
The newly signed Take It Down Act makes it unlawful to publish nonconsensual specific photographs — actual or AI-generated — and provides platforms simply 48 hours to adjust to a sufferer’s takedown request or face legal responsibility. While broadly praised as a long-overdue win for victims, specialists have additionally warned its obscure language, lax requirements for verifying claims, and tight compliance window may pave the way in which for overreach, censorship of reputable content material, and even surveillance.
“Content moderation at scale is broadly problematic and all the time finally ends up with vital and needed speech being censored,” India McKinney, director of federal affairs at Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, advised TechCrunch.
Online platforms have one yr to determine a course of for eradicating nonconsensual intimate imagery (NCII). While the regulation requires takedown requests come from victims or their representatives, it solely asks for a bodily or digital signature — no photograph ID or different type of verification is required. That probably goals to cut back obstacles for victims, however it may create a chance for abuse.
“I actually wish to be incorrect about this, however I believe there are going to be extra requests to take down photographs depicting queer and trans folks in relationships, and much more than that, I believe it’s gonna be consensual porn,” McKinney stated.
Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), a co-sponsor of the Take It Down Act, additionally sponsored the Kids Online Safety Act which places the onus on platforms to guard kids from dangerous content material on-line. Blackburn has stated she believes content material associated to transgender folks is dangerous to children. Similarly, the Heritage Foundation — the conservative suppose tank behind Project 2025 — has additionally stated that “preserving trans content material away from kids is defending children.”
Because of the legal responsibility that platforms face in the event that they don’t take down a picture inside 48 hours of receiving a request, “the default goes to be that they only take it down with out doing any investigation to see if this really is NCII or if it’s one other kind of protected speech, or if it’s even related to the one that’s making the request,” stated McKinney.
Snapchat and Meta have each stated they’re supportive of the regulation, however neither responded to TechCrunch’s requests for extra details about how they’ll confirm whether or not the individual requesting a takedown is a sufferer.
Mastodon, a decentralized platform that hosts its personal flagship server that others can be a part of, advised TechCrunch it could lean in direction of removing if it was too troublesome to confirm the sufferer.
Mastodon and different decentralized platforms like Bluesky or Pixelfed could also be particularly susceptible to the chilling impact of the 48-hour takedown rule. These networks depend on independently operated servers, typically run by nonprofits or people. Under the regulation, the FTC can deal with any platform that doesn’t “moderately comply” with takedown calls for as committing an “unfair or misleading act or follow” – even when the host isn’t a business entity.
“This is troubling on its face, however it’s notably so at a second when the chair of the FTC has taken unprecedented steps to politicize the company and has explicitly promised to make use of the ability of the company to punish platforms and companies on an ideological, versus principled, foundation,” the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, a nonprofit devoted to ending revenge porn, stated in an announcement.
Proactive monitoring
McKinney predicts that platforms will begin moderating content material earlier than it’s disseminated so that they have fewer problematic posts to take down sooner or later.
Platforms are already utilizing AI to watch for dangerous content material.
Kevin Guo, CEO and co-founder of AI-generated content material detection startup Hive, stated his firm works with on-line platforms to detect deepfakes and youngster sexual abuse materials (CSAM). Some of Hive’s clients embrace Reddit, Giphy, Vevo, Bluesky, and BeReal.
“We have been really one of many tech corporations that endorsed that invoice,” Guo advised TechCrunch. “It’ll assist clear up some fairly vital issues and compel these platforms to undertake options extra proactively.”
Hive’s mannequin is a software-as-a-service, so the startup doesn’t management how platforms use its product to flag or take away content material. But Guo stated many consumers insert Hive’s API on the level of add to watch earlier than something is distributed out to the neighborhood.
A Reddit spokesperson advised TechCrunch the platform makes use of “subtle inner instruments, processes, and groups to handle and take away” NCII. Reddit additionally companions with nonprofit SWGfl to deploy its StopNCII software, which scans stay site visitors for matches towards a database of identified NCII and removes correct matches. The firm didn’t share how it could make sure the individual requesting the takedown is the sufferer.
McKinney warns this type of monitoring may lengthen into encrypted messages sooner or later. While the regulation focuses on public or semi-public dissemination, it additionally requires platforms to “take away and make affordable efforts to stop the reupload” of nonconsensual intimate photographs. She argues this might incentivize proactive scanning of all content material, even in encrypted areas. The regulation doesn’t embrace any carve outs for end-to-end encrypted messaging companies like WhatsApp, Signal, or iMessage.
Meta, Signal, and Apple haven’t responded to TechCrunch’s request for extra info on their plans for encrypted messaging.
Broader free speech implications
On March 4, Trump delivered a joint tackle to Congress through which he praised the Take It Down Act and stated he seemed ahead to signing it into regulation.
“And I’m going to make use of that invoice for myself, too, in case you don’t thoughts,” he added. “There’s no person who will get handled worse than I do on-line.”
While the viewers laughed on the remark, not everybody took it as a joke. Trump hasn’t been shy about suppressing or retaliating towards unfavorable speech, whether or not that’s labeling mainstream media retailers “enemies of the folks,” barring The Associated Press from the Oval Office regardless of a courtroom order, or pulling funding from NPR and PBS.
On Thursday, the Trump administration barred Harvard University from accepting international scholar admissions, escalating a battle that started after Harvard refused to stick to Trump’s calls for that it make adjustments to its curriculum and eradicate DEI-related content material, amongst different issues. In retaliation, Trump has frozen federal funding to Harvard and threatened to revoke the college’s tax-exempt standing.
“At a time once we’re already seeing faculty boards attempt to ban books and we’re seeing sure politicians be very explicitly concerning the varieties of content material they don’t need folks to ever see, whether or not it’s vital race idea or abortion info or details about local weather change…it’s deeply uncomfortable for us with our previous work on content material moderation to see members of each events overtly advocating for content material moderation at this scale,” McKinney stated.
