Latest news with #IODA
NBC News
17-05-2025
- Business
- NBC News
Republicans seek to boost AI while tightening grip on social media and online speech
Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation over the last week that could give the federal government a tighter grasp on some tech platforms, while easing up government scrutiny on artificial intelligence. The Republican-led House Energy and Commerce Committee's budget reconciliation bill was introduced Tuesday and would give the federal government the ability to update IT systems as well as use AI systems at the Commerce Department. The bill would also put a pause on states' ability to enforce AI regulations for the next decade to allow the American AI market to grow and be studied. While some politicians have been skeptical and critical of AI, the Trump administration has been vocal about seeking to encourage the growth of the AI industry in the U.S. with few guardrails. On Friday, to cap off President Donald Trump's Middle East trip, the administration announced a deal with the United Arab Emirates to build a massive data center in the country that will serve American tech companies. While Republicans have worked to protect AI, lawmakers have also introduced bills that would tighten regulations on some tech companies. Two of the bills could make rules for tech platforms and their users more restrictive with the intent of making children safer online. On May 8, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), which would update 'the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age,' Lee said in a statement. IODA was first introduced in 2022, and again in 2024, but failed to become law. IODA would change the definition of obscenity, which applies a three-pronged test to content, to anything that 'appeals to the prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion,' and 'depicts, describes or represents actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual desires of a person.' It's currently illegal to transmit obscene content via telecommunications if it's intended as harassment or abuse. The bill would remove the requirement for that 'intent,' meaning it could criminalize any content deemed obscene that is transmitted via telecommunications systems. Despite the bill lacking bipartisan support or additional recorded co-sponsors, it has gained attention online and in the media for language that could make pornography something that can be prosecuted under laws pertaining to obscenity. However, proponents of the law hope it will prevent children from viewing lewd and obscene content. Currently, social media platforms are granted a 'good faith' immunity under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which means they can't be held legally liable for most content posted on their sites, aside from a few exceptions. Although a news release from Lee about IODA didn't specify who would be held legally responsible for newly obscene content, it said the bill is meant to create a uniform definition of obscenity, so it would be easier to identify and prosecute obscene content. 'Obscenity isn't protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children,' Lee said in the statement. 'Our bill updates the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age so this content can be taken down and its peddlers prosecuted.' On Wednesday, the bi-partisan Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which would hold websites accountable if they host content that is harmful to children, was reintroduced in the Senate. KOSA was first introduced in 2022 by Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., but failed to make it out of the chamber. During the 2023-2024 congressional term, KOSA was introduced again with amendments to address concerns over the vague wording in the bill. In July, KOSA passed in the Senate, but by the end of 2024, it had failed to advance in the House. The latest version of KOSA states that the bill would require social media platforms to 'remove addictive product features,' give parents more control and oversight of their kids' social media, create a duty for platforms to mitigate content focused on topics like suicide and disordered eating, and require transparency from social media platforms to share the steps they're taking to protect children. Those who are in favor of the bill say it would hold platforms legally accountable if they host harmful content that minors should not view. Opponents said it could inadvertently affect sites that host LGBTQ content. They're also concerned it could lead to more censorship online. 'Sponsors are claiming—again—that the latest version won't censor online content. It isn't true. This bill still sets up a censorship regime disguised as a 'duty of care,' and it will do what previous versions threatened: suppress lawful, important speech online, especially for young people,' Joe Mullin, senior policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said in a statement. However, updates made to the bill help to make its reach less broad and remove attorneys' general ability to prosecute platforms. It also makes more precise the harm it expects social media and other websites to protect against. This has led to some opponents of the bill changing their stance. The bill was reintroduced with Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., signing on. Last year, the bill passed in the Senate, 91-3, but died in the House. The current bill has been backed by Apple and Republican figures including Trump and Elon Musk. In a statement, Apple's senior director of government affairs for the Americas, Timothy Powderly, said the company was happy to offer its support for the bill, adding that everyone has a role to play in keeping children safe online. He also acknowledged the concerns around KOSA and praised the senators for working to improve the bill. 'As longtime advocates of privacy as a fundamental right, we believe these improvements are important, and hopefully the first steps towards comprehensive privacy legislation that ensures everyone's right to privacy online,' Powderly said. Critics have pushed back on both bills as some say they could result in overly policed speech online. Matt Navarra, a social media consultant and analyst who has worked with companies like Google and the U.S. and U.K. governments, said the bills — particularly KOSA — could have significant ramifications for social media platforms and the way people use them. Navarra said KOSA would force platforms to 'rethink recommendation engines, notifications, data tracking works for minors.' 'For engagement-driven platforms like TikTok or Instagram, that's a radical shift — it's not just about what's allowed, it's about how addictive and immersive experiences get redesigned or dismantled,' he said. 'So KOSA is less about content policing and more about an algorithmic detox especially for teens.' Adults would likely also see a major change in what is accessible online if IODA becomes law. 'In terms of the things that people are concerned about with the bill, particularly around censorship, KOSA does sort of introduce a duty of care that sounds good in theory but in practice could push platforms into over-moderating or flat-out removing content just to avoid the risk,' Navarra said. 'And the obscenity bill wraps this up even more.'
NDTV
14-05-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
All Pornography Websites In The US Could Soon Face A Ban Due To This Bill
Quick Reads Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. Senator Mike Lee introduced the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act, targeting pornography by redefining obscenity for the internet. The bill aims to protect families and empower law enforcement against harmful content. Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah has introduced a new bill aimed at criminalising pornography, warning against its harmful impact on American society. Lee, along with Illinois Representative Mary Miller, unveiled the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), which seeks to redefine "obscenity" for the internet era. According to the bill, content is considered obscene if it appeals to prurient interests, depicts sexual acts, and lacks literary, artistic, or scientific value. Specifically, the bill targets content that "depicts, describes or represents actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual desires of a person". Senator Lee emphasised the need for updated legislation, stating, "Obscenity isn't protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children." He added, "Our bill updates the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age so this content can be taken down and its peddlers prosecuted." Representative Miller echoed this sentiment, saying their legislation "equips law enforcement with the tools they need to target and remove obscene material from the internet, which is alarmingly destructive and far outside the bounds of protected free speech under the Constitution". The proposed bill aims to stop the production and dissemination of pornographic material and empower prosecutors to act against it. If passed, IODA would make it illegal to transmit obscene content across state lines, making it easier to prosecute offenders. Miller highlighted the importance of safeguarding American families, stating that she and Lee see it as their mission to "safeguard American families and ensure this dangerous material is kept out of our homes and off our screens". This move is consistent with the stance of many prominent conservatives who advocate for censorship when it comes to pornography, citing its potentially harmful psychological impact on vulnerable young people. However, the MAGA movement has struggled to disassociate itself from controversies surrounding pornography, including high-profile incidents involving adult film actress Stormy Daniels playing a role in US President Donald Trump's 'hush money' trial, Senator Ted Cruz accidentally 'liking' steamy posts on X, and House Speaker Mike Johnson saying that he and his son monitor each other's devices for exposure to X-rated content.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill to make all porn illegal introduced by Republican senator
A bill to make all pornography illegal has been introduced by a Republican senator. Mike Lee, of Utah, and Illinois representative Mary Miller say the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), will update 'the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age' if passed. Under current laws, as per the 1934 Communications Act, obscenity is defined as something that 'depicts, describes or represents actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual desires of a person', appeals to sexual interest and 'lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value'. The new bill proposes the 'intent' clause of the act be removed, meaning anyone who shares sexual content online could be prosecuted, even if they do not intend to distribute it. It would mean pornography websites would technically become illegal. 'Obscenity isn't protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children,' Mr Lee said, according to The Independent. The new bill will mean pornographic 'content can be taken down and its pedlars prosecuted,' Ms Miller said. It is her and Mr Lee's mission to 'safeguard American families and ensure this dangerous material is kept out of our homes and off our screens,' she added. It is Mr Miller's third attempt to push through such legislation. If passed, the bill will stop people profiting off the 'degradation' of others, the Republican said. The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, which some see as a blueprint for Donald Trump's policies, describes those who share and create pornographic content as 'child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women' who sell a product 'as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime'. Mr Trump has distanced himself from the project, saying he knows nothing about it. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hindustan Times
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
US to ban pornography, all ‘adult content' websites? Here's what Interstate Obscenity Definition Act says
Senator Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah, has filed a new bill that would redefine what is legally considered 'obscene' and implement a nationwide ban on pornography. The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), a piece of legislation, aims to update Supreme Court's decades-old standard for prosecuting obscene content online. If IODA gets approved, it could significantly alter federal law's treatment of sexual content, particularly in online contexts. Speaking to Mashable, adult industry attorney Corey D. Silverstein said, 'It may as well be an outright ban on pornography because basically, under [Lee's] definition, all adult entertainment, all forms of pornography, will be deemed obscene.' Representative Mary Miller of Illinois has co-sponsored the bill, which was submitted on Thursday. Notably, this is Lee's third attempt to enact legislation of this kind since 2022. Also Read: Trump asks Saudi Crown Prince MBS 'How Do You Sleep at Night?' in bizarre speech, takes dig at Tim Cook It would update the profanity test that has been used by regulators since the Miller v. California ruling of the Supreme Court in 1973. Critics claim that this criteria is out of date and challenging to implement, particularly in the digital age. If approved, the bill will permit for federal limitations or prohibitions on online pornography and allow for the prosecution of pornographic material that is distributed across state lines or from other nations. It may criminalize a lot of adult content, including consenting displays of sexuality, and expand the types of graphic information that could be classified as federal crimes. Taking to X, Utah Senator Lee wrote: 'Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. But hazy, unenforceable definitions have allowed pornography companies to infect our society, peddle smut to children, and do business across state lines unimpeded.' This is the first and most important step in preventing the individuals and businesses who make money by dehumanizing their fellow humans and destroying countless lives, he added. This month, the Congress will consider the proposal, However, it is unclear whether it will have bipartisan support.
Time of India
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Pornhub and other ‘adult content' websites facing ban in the US? New bill says 'Yes'
Pornhub and other 'adult content' websites facing ban in the US? New bill says 'Yes' A newly proposed bill in the United States Congress could bring sweeping changes to the legal landscape of online pornography . The legislation, known as the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), was introduced by Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee and co-sponsored by Representative Mary Miller of Illinois. According to The Economic Times report, if enacted, the bill would redefine what constitutes "obscene" content under federal law , potentially making a wide range of adult material illegal across the country. This significant shift could impact content creators, platforms, and consumers, raising critical questions about free speech, digital privacy, and the future of online expression. Given the potential for far-reaching effects, this proposal has sparked intense debate among lawmakers, legal experts, and civil rights advocates. What is the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA) The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act is a legislative effort to revise the federal definition of obscenity, which has remained largely unchanged for decades. Currently, the definition of obscene material is based on the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Miller v. California, which established a three-part standard, commonly known as the "Miller Test." For content to be considered legally obscene under this test, it must: by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo Appeal to prurient (sexual) interests, Depict sexual conduct in a patently offensive way according to contemporary community standards, Lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The IODA seeks to eliminate much of this nuance by creating a stricter, more straightforward definition, as reported by The Economic Times . It proposes that any material that appeals to prurient interests in nudity, sex, or excretion, and depicts or describes sexual acts with the intent to arouse, could be classified as obscene. Notably, the bill removes the requirement to prove the "intent" of distribution, a significant departure from the existing Communications Act of 1934. This change would make it easier for federal authorities to prosecute cases involving sexually explicit content, even if the creators did not specifically intend to distribute such material as obscene. Key provisions of the IODA The IODA introduces several critical changes to existing obscenity laws, including: Broader definition of obscenity: Removes the requirement for community standards and intent, focusing solely on the content itself. Stricter federal oversight: Extends federal jurisdiction over obscene material distributed across state lines or internationally, regardless of local laws. Removal of artistic or scientific exemptions: Omits the current requirement to assess the artistic, scientific, political, or literary value of the content. Focus on online distribution: Specifically targets digital platforms and websites that host or distribute adult content, reflecting the realities of the internet age. Senator Mike Lee's rationale for the bill In a recent post on X (formerly Twitter), Senator Mike Lee argued that the current legal definitions of obscenity are too vague and difficult to enforce, allowing the adult entertainment industry to operate largely unchecked. He stated, "Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. But hazy, unenforceable definitions have allowed pornography companies to infect our society, peddle smut to children, and do business across state lines unimpeded." Lee emphasized that the IODA is intended to close these loopholes and provide a more robust legal framework to combat what he views as the harmful effects of pornography. This is not Lee's first attempt to tighten federal obscenity laws. He introduced similar bills in both 2022 and 2023, although those efforts failed to gain sufficient support. However, this latest version, with its more streamlined approach, may have a better chance of advancing through Congress. Impact on online pornography and free speech If passed, the IODA could have profound implications for the adult entertainment industry and digital free speech in the United States. Critics argue that the bill's broad definition of obscenity could criminalize a wide range of consensual adult content, including materials that may lack "serious artistic or scientific value" but are still widely accepted in modern culture. This raises concerns about potential overreach and censorship, particularly given the bill's removal of the "community standards" clause, which has historically served as a buffer against overly restrictive interpretations of obscenity. Additionally, the bill's focus on digital distribution could pose significant challenges for online platforms. Many adult websites are hosted or accessed across multiple states or even international borders, potentially exposing them to federal prosecution if the bill becomes law. What makes the IODA different from past obscenity laws The key distinction between the IODA and previous obscenity laws is its simplified, more aggressive approach to defining and prosecuting obscene material. Unlike the Miller Test, which requires a nuanced assessment of local community standards and artistic value, the IODA focuses solely on the nature of the content itself. This shift reflects a broader trend among conservative lawmakers to crack down on what they see as harmful digital content, regardless of artistic intent or regional cultural differences. Moreover, the IODA directly targets the modern realities of digital communication, which the original 1973 ruling could not have anticipated. By removing the "intent" clause, the bill lowers the bar for prosecution, potentially making it easier for federal authorities to bring cases against content creators, platforms, and even individual users. Next steps for the bill in Congress The IODA is currently under consideration in Congress, where it will likely face a challenging path to passage. While it may attract support among conservative lawmakers, it is expected to encounter significant opposition from free speech advocates, digital rights organizations, and some business groups. The bill's success will depend largely on whether it can garner bipartisan support, a critical factor in the current polarized political environment. For now, the bill is gaining attention not only for its potential legal impact but also for the broader cultural debate it has sparked over the role of adult content in American society. Also read | Airtel recharge plans | Jio recharge plans | BSNL recharge plans AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
