California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB646

Introduced
2/16/23  
Introduced
2/16/23  
Refer
3/1/23  
Refer
3/1/23  
Refer
3/21/23  
Refer
3/21/23  
Refer
3/29/23  
Refer
3/29/23  
Refer
4/12/23  
Refer
4/12/23  
Report Pass
4/26/23  
Report Pass
4/26/23  
Refer
4/27/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Engrossed
5/22/23  
Engrossed
5/22/23  
Refer
5/26/23  
Refer
5/26/23  
Report Pass
6/20/23  
Refer
6/21/23  

Caption

Civil law: personal rights: online sex trafficking: sexual photographs.

Impact

The bill significantly alters existing civil law provisions regarding personal rights and online distribution of sexual content. By allowing minors to take legal action, it ensures that they have recourse against those who would exploit them through the distribution of sexual images. Additionally, it mandates that online platforms identify agents responsible for handling infringement claims, which facilitates enforcement and potentially increases accountability for online content distribution networks.

Summary

Senate Bill 646, introduced by Senator Cortese, addresses the issue of online sex trafficking regarding individuals depicted in sexual photographs, particularly minors. This legislation seeks to establish a mechanism through which individuals depicted in sexual images before the age of 18 can file civil actions against those who distribute such materials without consent. It emphasizes the protection of minors from exploitation through stringent penalties for violators, including the imposition of statutory damages of $200,000 for those who fail to cease distribution of infringing material upon notice.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 646 appears to be largely supportive among child protection advocates and lawmakers concerned about the prevalence of online exploitation. However, some concerns may arise regarding the implications for internet service providers, as they are tasked with compliance and may face legal repercussions under this legislation. The urgency of addressing online child exploitation, particularly in light of increasing reports of child sexual abuse material during the pandemic, has garnered significant attention.

Contention

A notable point of contention regarding SB 646 is the balance between protecting minors and placing additional regulatory burdens on internet service providers. Critics may argue that the bill could impose excessive liabilities on platforms, stifling innovation and freedom of expression. Additionally, the practical enforcement of such measures raises questions about resource allocation for monitoring compliance and ensuring swift action against violators.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB435

Civil law: personal rights: online sex trafficking: sexual photographs.

CA AB602

Depiction of individual using digital or electronic technology: sexually explicit material: cause of action.

CA SB564

Depiction of individual using digital or electronic technology: sexually explicit material: cause of action.

CA AB2408

Social media platform: child users: addiction.

CA SB378

Online marketplaces: illicit cannabis: reporting and liability.

CA AB1979

Doxing Victims Recourse Act.

CA AB1356

Reproductive health care services.

CA AB886

California Journalism Preservation Act.