Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 6, 2025
Bottom line
The bill creates federal legal avenues for individuals to seek redress and for the government to prosecute those who share AI-generated or digitally manipulated intimate images without consent, aiming to protect victims from severe harm.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a new federal civil right of action and creates federal criminal penalties for the nonconsensual disclosure of intimate digital depictions, commonly known as deepfakes. It defines what constitutes such a depiction, outlines specific requirements for valid consent, and provides exceptions for legitimate activities like law enforcement or public interest reporting.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this legislation is crucial to protect individuals from the severe emotional, reputational, and economic harm caused by the nonconsensual dissemination of deepfake intimate images. They contend it provides victims with much-needed legal recourse and federal deterrence in an evolving digital landscape where state laws may be insufficient.
Opponents contend
Critics might raise concerns about potential impacts on free speech, the broadness of certain definitions, or the practical effectiveness of such legislation in curbing online behavior, though specific organized opposition arguments are not present in the bill text.
The bill is concise and relatively easy to read, allowing for a quick understanding of its core provisions and implications.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the Act as the 'Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act,' which is how the bill will commonly be referred to in public discourse and legal contexts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a clear and concise short title helps the public and legal professionals easily identify and reference the legislation, contributing to its accessibility and public awareness.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against short titles, as they are standard legislative practice.
Tradeoffs
None apparent for a short title.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(a)
Definitions for Intimate Digital Depictions
This section defines key terms central to the bill, including 'depicted individual,' 'digital depiction,' and 'sexually explicit conduct.' Crucially, 'intimate digital depiction' is defined as a realistic visual depiction created or altered using digital manipulation that shows uncovered genitals, pubic area, anus, postpubescent female nipple, bodily sexual fluids, or sexually explicit conduct of an identifiable individual.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(b)
Federal Civil Right of Action for Nonconsensual Disclosure
This provision creates a federal civil cause of action, allowing individuals to sue those who disclose intimate digital depictions without their consent. This applies if the disclosure occurs in or affects interstate or foreign commerce, and the discloser knew or recklessly disregarded the individual's lack of consent. It also permits legal guardians or representatives to act on behalf of minors, incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased individuals.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(c)
Valid Consent Criteria for Disclosure
This section clarifies that consent to *create* an intimate digital depiction does not automatically imply consent for its *disclosure*. For disclosure to be validly consented to, it must be set forth in a written agreement, in plain language, signed knowingly and voluntarily by the depicted individual, and include a general description of the depiction and any audiovisual work it will be incorporated into.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(d)
Available Relief in Civil Actions
In civil actions, victims can recover monetary gains made by the defendant, actual damages (including emotional distress) or liquidated damages of $150,000, punitive damages, and litigation costs including reasonable attorney's fees. Courts can also order equitable relief, such as temporary restraining orders or injunctions, to stop the display or disclosure of the depiction. Additionally, courts may allow plaintiffs to use pseudonyms to maintain anonymity.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(e)
Exceptions to Civil Action
This section outlines specific circumstances where a civil action cannot be brought. These exceptions include disclosures made in good faith to law enforcement for reporting or investigating unlawful activity, disclosures as part of a legal proceeding, disclosures for matters of legitimate public concern (though being a public figure alone does not qualify), or disclosures reasonably intended to assist the identifiable individual.
Section 3, amending Chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code, by inserting Section 2252D(a)
Federal Criminal Prohibition on Nonconsensual Disclosure
This section establishes a new federal criminal offense for disclosing or threatening to disclose an intimate digital depiction in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce. The offense requires either intent to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or cause substantial harm to the finances or reputation of the depicted individual, OR actual knowledge or reckless disregard that such disclosure will cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm.
Section 3, amending Chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code, by inserting Section 2252D(b)
Penalties for Criminal Offense
The standard penalties for the criminal offense include a fine and/or imprisonment for not more than 2 years. However, if the creation, reproduction, or distribution of the intimate digital depiction could reasonably be expected to affect administrative, legislative, or judicial proceedings (including elections or foreign relations) or facilitate violence, the penalty increases to a fine and/or imprisonment for not more than 10 years.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(h) (civil); Section 3, amending 18 U.S.C. 2252D(d) (criminal)
Protection for Interactive Computer Services
This provision grants legal immunity to providers of interactive computer services (e.g., social media platforms) for two actions: voluntarily restricting access to intimate digital depictions in good faith, and providing technical means for content providers to restrict access. This aims to encourage platforms to moderate harmful content without fear of legal repercussions.
The definitions of 'consent' and 'disclose' for both the civil and criminal actions are not fully defined within this bill but instead cross-reference Section 1309 of the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2022.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(a)(1) and (4); Section 3, amending 18 U.S.C. 2252D(e)(1) and (4)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to avoid redundancy and maintain consistency with existing legal frameworks, rather than an attempt to obscure the provision.
Case for: Referencing existing definitions streamlines legislation and ensures consistency across related federal laws, leveraging established legal interpretations.
Case against: Requiring external reference can make the bill less accessible to the general public and even some legal professionals who may not be immediately familiar with the referenced statute.
Estimated impact: Clarifies the fundamental concepts of consent and disclosure for all actions under this bill, impacting all parties.
The definitions of 'realistic visual depiction' and 'sexually explicit conduct' are also established by cross-reference to Section 2256 of title 18, United States Code.
Section 2, amending VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2022, Section 1309A(a)(3) and (6); Section 3, amending 18 U.S.C. 2252D(e)(3) and (6)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative technique to ensure legal consistency and avoid re-defining terms that already have established legal meanings in related contexts, particularly in criminal law.
Case for: Using established definitions from Title 18, which deals with sexual exploitation and abuse, ensures that the new law benefits from existing judicial interpretations and prosecutorial guidelines, promoting consistency in application.
Case against: The reliance on external definitions, particularly from a complex criminal statute, can make the bill less transparent and harder for non-specialists to fully comprehend without extensive legal research.
Estimated impact: Shapes the core understanding of what constitutes a 'digital depiction' and 'sexually explicit conduct' under the Act, directly impacting its scope.