QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress narrows Big Tech's immunity shield for deepfakes and cyberstalking

H.R. 6334 — Deepfake Liability Act · Filed by Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Dec 1, 2025 · Referred to committee

72%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
18/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Consumer Protection / Platform…

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill amends Section 230 of the Communications Act to require social media platforms and online services to implement reasonable processes for addressing cyberstalking and nonconsensual intimate imagery (deepfakes and leaked private sexual content). Platforms must establish notice-and-removal procedures, maintain data logs for legal proceedings, and remove flagged content within 48 hours. The bill also expands the definition of 'information content provider' to include platforms that use generative AI to create or manipulate such content, potentially reducing their liability shield. Ordinary people gain faster removal of intimate privacy violations and cyberstalking, but platforms face new compliance burdens and potential liability expansion.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is a duty-of-care standard imposed on platforms to address nonconsensual intimate imagery and cyberstalking. It is fundamentally a consumer protection measure that narrows Section 230's liability shield for platforms that fail to implement reasonable safeguards, not a blanket deregulation or industry carve-out.

What the text implies

  • Generative AI platforms may face expanded liability if they are deemed to 'create or develop' intimate imagery through solicitation, encouragement, or use of generative models—this could capture AI image-generation services and deepfake tools, not just social media platforms.
  • The 48-hour removal mandate may incentivize platforms to over-remove content out of caution, potentially chilling legitimate speech or satire that falls near the definitional boundaries of 'sexually explicit digital forgery' or 'cyberstalking.'

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

Legal services / law firms (increased litigation and compliance work); Content moderation vendors and AI safety companies (platforms will outsource compliance); Cybersecurity and data preservation service providers

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record