Nonconsensual Intimate Image Clearinghouse.
What changed between versions
The definition of nonconsensual intimate image now explicitly excludes images of minors, meaning the clearinghouse would only handle cases where the depicted person is an adult. This is a significant limitation on who can use the system.
The authentic image prong was narrowed from any 'authentic intimate image distributed without consent' to specifically 'an authentic intimate image depicting a person nude or engaged in sexual conduct distributed without consent.' New cross-reference definitions for 'nude' and 'sexual conduct' were added, both pointing to Section 1708.86.
The definition of 'covered platform' was narrowed from 'an online service that makes content publicly available' to 'an online service that makes user-generated content publicly available,' and now explicitly excludes providers of broadband Internet access service as defined in Section 3100. This removes ISPs and non-user-generated-content services from the bill's reach.
A separate Section 1 containing legislative intent language about establishing a centralized clearinghouse for adults who are victims of online exploitation, abuse, or trafficking was removed entirely. The bill now goes directly into operative provisions without this framing section.
The bill's title was narrowed from 'An act relating to prevention and investigation of crimes' to simply 'An act to add Section 1708.87 to the Civil Code, and to add Section 647.05 to the Penal Code, relating to the internet,' removing the broader crime-prevention framing.
In Penal Code Section 647.05(b), the standard for when a peace officer must provide information to the Department of Justice was changed from 'is able to verify that a violation involves nonconsensual intimate images' to 'is able to verify possesses knowledge that a violation involves nonconsensual intimate images.' The language is awkward and appears to lower the threshold from active verification to mere knowledge.
The fiscal committee vote changed from 'no' to 'yes,' indicating the bill now has fiscal committee approval. The state-mandated local program designation also changed from 'no' to 'yes,' formally acknowledging that the peace officer duties impose costs on local agencies.