PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Foushee, Valerie P. [D-NC-4] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 29, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10433 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10433 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10433 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10433 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-16 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed SAFE Platforms Act would require covered online platforms to limit their role in consumer fraud, offer scam-reporting tools, use more protective privacy defaults, and verify advertisers. It would affect platforms meeting user or revenue thresholds, their users, content creators, and advertisers, with exceptions for certain services and content. The Federal Trade Commission, states, and injured people could enforce its requirements. Platforms following specified safeguards would be treated as complying with the prohibition on contributing to fraudulent content.
This Act may be cited as the Stopping Abuse and Fraud Enabled by Platforms Act or the SAFE Platforms Act.
A covered platform may not materially contribute to the development of fraudulent content directed at consumers.
a covered platform shall provide an easily accessible mechanism for a user to report suspected fraudulent content and a content creator to submit a counter-notice that contests the removal of content
A covered platform shall configure any default privacy setting to reduce fraud vulnerability
a covered platform shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to verify the identity of advertisers before allowing them to purchase advertisements
has at least 100,000 monthly active users or generates annual gross revenue in excess of $25,000,000, adjusted annually to reflect adjustments in the Consumer Price Index.
This Act does not apply to the following: (1) Interactive computer services that function primarily as internet service providers, email providers, or data storage providers. (2) Content that is transmitted through a covered platform but not stored on the platform.
The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce section 2 and any regulation promulgated under such section
the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of the residents of the State
A person injured by an act or practice in violation of section 2 or a regulation promulgated under such section may bring in an appropriate State court or district court of the United States
A covered platform shall be deemed to meet the requirements under subsection (a) if the platform does the following
A covered platform would be an interactive computer service that makes content from an information content provider available for users to view or interact with, and has either at least 100,000 monthly active users or annual gross revenue above $25 million. The revenue threshold would be adjusted annually using the Consumer Price Index, an inflation measure. The bill incorporates existing statutory definitions of the two types of providers.
The term covered platform means a provider of an interactive computer service that— (A) makes available information provided by an information content provider; (B) enables users to view or interact with such information; and (C) has at least 100,000 monthly active users or generates annual gross revenue in excess of $25,000,000, adjusted annually to reflect adjustments in the Consumer Price Index.
The term interactive computer service has the meaning given such term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)).
The term information content provider has the meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)).
The bill defines fraud as a statement, omission, or practice in or affecting commerce that is likely to mislead a reasonable consumer and matters to consumer decisions. Its prohibition on materially contributing to fraudulent content would reach conduct beyond providing neutral tools, including encouraging fraud and promoting content the platform knows or reasonably should recognize as fraudulent. The Federal Trade Commission could identify additional covered conduct by regulation.
The term fraud means any representation, omission, or practice in or affecting commerce that— (A) is likely to mislead a consumer acting reasonably under the circumstances; and (B) is material to consumer decision-making.
The term fraudulent content means content that constitutes fraud.
A covered platform may not materially contribute to the development of fraudulent content directed at consumers.
The term materially contribute means conduct that goes beyond providing neutral tools for the development or dissemination of fraudulent content, including the following: (A) Encouraging or inducing a third party to develop or disseminate fraudulent content. (B) Targeting, recommending, promoting, curating, or prioritizing fraudulent content directed at consumers that the covered platform knows or has reason to know is fraudulent. (C) Other conduct that the Commission determines to be a material contribution through regulations promulgated pursuant to the rulemaking authority conferred under section 3 of this Act.
The term has reason to know means circumstances that would make the fraudulent nature of content apparent to a reasonable operator of a covered platform.
Within 180 days after enactment, covered platforms would have to offer accessible reporting and content-removal challenge mechanisms. A visible Report Scam button or link would be required on all content that could contain advertising, commercial, or promotional material. Reporting could not require multiple pages or extensive information and would need to work with common assistive technologies in the user's selected interface language.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a covered platform shall provide an easily accessible mechanism for a user to report suspected fraudulent content and a content creator to submit a counter-notice that contests the removal of content
A clearly visible and accessible Report Scam button or link on all content that could contain an advertisement, commercial, or promotional material.
A simplified reporting process that— (i) does not require a user to navigate multiple pages or provide extensive information; (ii) is accessible and compatible with common assistive technologies and available in the selected interface language of the user
The reporting process would allow users to supply identification, contact information, a sworn good-faith statement, and facts showing fraud. Platforms would have to acknowledge reports within 30 days and notify the content creator. A creator's counter-notice would include identification, contact information, a sworn statement that removal or disabling was a mistake, and supporting facts.
allows users to provide— (I) their identity and contact information; (II) a sworn statement under penalty of perjury that the report is made in good faith; and (III) the specific factual basis that demonstrates the reported content is fraudulent.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of a report within 30 days after submission of the report. (D) Notice to the content creator that a report alleging fraud has been filed against them.
A counter-notice mechanism that includes— (i) the identity and contact information of the content creator; (ii) a sworn statement under penalty of perjury that the creator has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material as fraudulent; and (iii) specific facts supporting the statement that the reported content is not fraudulent.
Privacy defaults would hide a user's account and posted media from unconnected users and block direct messaging with those users unless the user expressly and unambiguously permits broader access or access for specific users.
A covered platform shall configure any default privacy setting to reduce fraud vulnerability, including through the following settings: (i) Not displaying the existence of the account of a user to any unconnected user unless the user has expressly and unambiguously chosen to make the existence of their account public generally or for specific users. (ii) Not displaying media created or posted by a user on a covered platform to any unconnected user unless the user has expressly and unambiguously chosen to make their media publicly available generally or for specific users. (iii) Not permitting direct messaging on a covered platform between a user and any unconnected user unless the user has expressly and unambiguously decided to allow direct messaging generally or for specific users.
For these privacy rules, an unconnected user would have to be both unverified by the platform and without a mutual connection to the relevant user. A mutual connection means both users have a formal connection, such as a friend or follow, to the same third user; sharing a group, forum, or public page would not count.
The term unconnected user means a user who— (A) is not verified by the covered platform; and (B) does not share a mutual connection with the user whose content or account is at issue.
The term mutual connection— (A) means a relationship in which two users on a covered platform are each directly connected to the same third-party user through a formal connection mechanism such as a friend or follow; and (B) does not include shared participation between two users in the same group, forum, or public page.
Privacy defaults would also hide users' locations and connections unless they expressly and unambiguously choose to share them. Search engines could index a user's account profile only after an express, unambiguous opt-in.
(iv) Not displaying the location of a user to other users, unless the user expressly and unambiguously shares their location generally or with specific users. (v) Not displaying the users connected to a user on a covered platform unless the user expressly and unambiguously chooses to share the information generally or for specific users. (vi) Disabling search engine indexing of the account profile of a user unless the user expressly and unambiguously opts into indexing.
Platforms could not offer one setting that weakens all privacy defaults at once. They also could not reduce service quality or functionality because a user keeps stronger privacy settings, unless a limitation is strictly necessary for technical reasons and no reasonable privacy-preserving alternative exists.
A covered platform may not— (i) provide a user with a single setting that makes all of the default privacy settings less protective at once; or (ii) degrade, limit, or reduce the functionality, performance, or quality of services as a result of a user maintaining higher privacy settings unless the limitation is strictly necessary due to the technical requirements of providing the requested service and the platform cannot reasonably provide the service through alternative means that would preserve the privacy settings of the user.
Platforms would have to take reasonable measures against multiple accounts used to evade fraud enforcement, including replacement accounts, repeated fraud patterns, and coordinated fraud networks. They could not use additional design features that facilitate fraud and would have to address fraudulent profiles, pages, reviews, likes, and other engagement measures.
A covered platform shall implement reasonable measures to detect and prevent the creation of multiple accounts by the same individual for the purpose of evading enforcement actions related to fraudulent content, including the following: (A) Accounts created shortly after suspension or removal of an account for fraud violations. (B) Accounts that exhibit substantially similar patterns of fraudulent behavior to previously suspended accounts. (C) Coordinated networks of accounts promoting fraudulent schemes.
A covered platform— (A) may not use additional platform design features that facilitate fraud; (B) shall adopt reasonable measures to prevent the creation of fraudulent profiles and pages; and (C) shall implement systems to prevent fraudulent reviews, likes, and other engagement metrics.
The bill offers a safe harbor—a route to being treated as complying—with the prohibition on materially contributing to fraudulent content. It would require reasonable anti-fraud steps, policy and procedure reviews and updates at least annually, and review of reported fraudulent content within 48 hours of notice, along with the response requirements described below. The safe harbor expressly applies to section 2(a).
A covered platform shall be deemed to meet the requirements under subsection (a) if the platform does the following: (A) Implements reasonable steps to address fraudulent content. (B) Reviews and updates such policies and procedures not less frequently than annually. (C) Reviews reported fraudulent content within 48 hours after receiving notice of the content.
Adopts and follows reasonable policies and procedures to detect and initiate appropriate steps with respect to the fraudulent content within 7 days after receiving notice of the content
Reasonable anti-fraud steps would be assessed in light of a platform's size, resources, users, and the content involved. They would include enforcing anti-fraud policies, accessible reporting, timely review, removing or limiting content determined to be fraudulent, warning potentially affected users, and addressing repeated or similar fraud.
The term reasonable steps means proactive and reactive measures that can reasonably be expected from a covered platform considering the size, resources, and user base of the platform, and the nature of the fraudulent content at issue and includes the following: (A) Implementing and enforcing clear policies against fraudulent content. (B) Maintaining an accessible and responsive mechanism for users to report suspected fraudulent content. (C) Reviewing reported content in a timely manner. (D) Removing or limiting the distribution of content determined to be fraudulent. (E) Warning potentially affected users when fraudulent content has been identified. (F) Implementing reasonable measures to prevent repeated or similar fraudulent content.
For the safe harbor, platforms would generally need policies and procedures to detect fraud and begin appropriate steps within seven days of notice. Exceptions would allow a reasonable finding after investigation that the content is not fraudulent, or extra time for complexity, report volume, or other reasonable factors. Extra time would require written notice within seven days explaining the reason and expected timeline. An extension could not exceed 30 days without written Federal Trade Commission approval for additional 30-day extensions.
Adopts and follows reasonable policies and procedures to detect and initiate appropriate steps with respect to the fraudulent content within 7 days after receiving notice of the content, unless— (i) the platform reasonably determines after investigation that the content is not fraudulent; or (ii) additional time is necessary due to the complexity of the investigation, volume of reports, or other reasonable factors if— (I) the platform provides written notice to the reporting party within 7 days after the notice was received by the platform that explains the need for additional time and the expected timeline for resolution; and (II) any extension beyond the 7-day period described in subclause (I) may not exceed 30 days unless the platform obtains written approval from the Commission for additional 30-day extensions.
The term Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
A platform could stop processing additional reports from a user after three or more reports were found false or made in bad faith within 12 months. It would first have to give that user notice and an opportunity to contest the determination.
A covered platform may refuse to process additional reports from a user that has submitted three or more reports determined to be false or made in bad faith within a 12-month period, if platform provided that user with notice and opportunity to contest such determination.
Within 180 days after enactment, the Federal Trade Commission would have to issue advertising accessibility rules covering minimum text sizes for important terms and prices, clear labels, text-background contrast, disability access, and additional design requirements to prevent deceptive or misleading advertising.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate regulations that establish accessibility requirements for advertising content on a covered platform that includes the following: (1) Minimum font size requirements for material terms, conditions, and pricing information. (2) Requirements for clear and conspicuous labeling. (3) Contrast standards between text and background. (4) Standards for making advertising content accessible to users with disabilities. (5) Additional design requirements to prevent deceptive or misleading advertising practices.
The term Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
An advertiser would be a person or entity paying a covered platform to distribute content promoting a product or service in interstate commerce. Within 180 days after enactment, platforms would have to establish and maintain reasonable procedures to verify advertisers before ad purchases. These would cover names, physical addresses, contact details, government identifiers, business registration where applicable, industry and high-risk activity declarations, payment methods, and authenticity checks.
The term advertiser means any person or entity that pays a covered platform to display, promote, or otherwise disseminate content that promotes a product or service in interstate commerce to users of the platform.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a covered platform shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to verify the identity of advertisers before allowing them to purchase advertisements
(A) Collection and verification of the following, with regard to the advertiser: (i) Legal name and physical address. (ii) Valid contact information, including email address and phone number. (iii) Tax identification number or other government-issued identifier. (iv) For a business, proof of registration or incorporation in the relevant jurisdiction. (v) A declaration of industry type and whether the advertiser engages in the sale or promotion of high-risk categories, as applied to products, services, or opportunities. (B) Verification of payment methods and accounts used by the advertiser. (C) Reasonable steps to confirm the authenticity of the information provided.
Advertisers in high-risk categories, or selling or promoting restricted or high-risk products, services, or opportunities, would face extra documentation, review of their online presence and business history, and periodic re-verification. Listed categories include financial services and investments, health, educational credentials, housing and real estate, gambling, unregulated financial products such as cryptocurrency and non-fungible tokens, and age-restricted consumables. The Federal Trade Commission could add categories by regulation.
For an advertiser in a high-risk category, or that engage in the sale or promotion of restricted or high-risk products, services, or opportunities, a covered platform shall implement enhanced verification that includes the following with regard to the advertiser: (A) Additional documentation to validate the identity and business operations. (B) Review of the online presence and business history. (C) Periodic re-verification.
High-risk categories include the following: (A) Financial services and investment opportunities. (B) Health products and services. (C) Educational credentials and certification. (D) Housing and real estate. (E) Gambling. (F) Unregulated financial products, including cryptocurrency and non-fungible tokens. (G) Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, and other consumables restricted by age. (H) Categories identified by the Commission through regulations.
The term Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
Platforms would have to retain advertiser verification records for at least three years after the last advertisement or commercial activity. Users viewing an advertiser's content would need reasonably accessible information identifying its legal name, home country or jurisdiction, and how long it has held a platform account.
A covered platform shall maintain records of advertiser verification information for a period of at least three years after the date of the last advertisement or commercial activity.
A covered platform shall provide a user with access to basic information about any advertiser whose content they view, which shall be accessible through direct display on the advertisement, a clearly visible link, or button associated with the advertisement or commercial content, or through other reasonably accessible means, that includes the following: (A) The legal name of the advertiser. (B) The country or jurisdiction where the advertiser is based. (C) How long the advertiser has maintained an account on the platform.
Within 180 days after enactment, platforms would have to establish and maintain systems to track advertisers found to violate platform fraud policies, prevent them from opening accounts under different identities, and apply extra scrutiny to new accounts resembling previously suspended ones.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a covered platform shall establish and maintain a system to do the following: (A) Track any advertiser found to have violated platform policies related to fraudulent content. (B) Prevent any such advertiser from creating a new account under a different identity. (C) Apply enhanced scrutiny to any new account that shares characteristics with a previously suspended account.
Violations of section 2 or its regulations would be treated as violations of Federal Trade Commission rules addressing unfair or deceptive practices. The commission would enforce them using the jurisdiction, powers, and procedures incorporated from the Federal Trade Commission Act, including its penalties, privileges, and immunities.
A violation of section 2 or a regulation promulgated under such section shall be treated as a violation of a regulation under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce section 2 and any regulation promulgated under such section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section. Any person who violates such section or a regulation promulgated under such section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act.
State attorneys general and other state officials or agencies could sue on residents' behalf when they have reason to believe a section 2 violation harms or threatens residents' interests. They could seek orders stopping violations or requiring compliance, compensation for residents, and other appropriate relief in state or federal court. Existing state investigative powers would be preserved.
In any case in which the attorney general of a State, or an official or agency of a State, has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of such State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by an act or practice in violation of section 2 or a regulation promulgated under such section, the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of the residents of the State in an appropriate State court or district court of the United States to— (A) enjoin such act or practice; (B) enforce compliance with such subsection or such regulation; (C) obtain damages, restitution, or other compensation on behalf of residents of the State; or (D) obtain such other legal and equitable relief as the court may consider to be appropriate.
nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent an attorney general, official, or agency of a State from exercising the powers conferred on the attorney general, official, or agency by the laws of such State to conduct investigations, administer oaths and affirmations, or compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documentary and other evidence.
States would have to notify the Federal Trade Commission and send the complaint before suing, or immediately upon filing if advance notice is not feasible. The commission could join the case, be heard, and seek appeals. While a federal enforcement case brought by the commission or U.S. Attorney General is pending, states could not bring an action under this provision against the same defendants for violations alleged in that federal complaint.
Before filing an action under this subsection, the attorney general, official, or agency of the State involved shall provide to the Federal Trade Commission a written notice of such action and a copy of the complaint for such action. If the attorney general, official, or agency determines that it is not feasible to provide the notice described in this paragraph before the filing of the action, the attorney general, official, or agency shall provide written notice of the action and a copy of the complaint to the Federal Trade Commission immediately upon the filing of the action.
the Federal Trade Commission shall have the right— (i) to intervene in the action; (ii) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters arising therein; and (iii) to file petitions for appeal.
If the Federal Trade Commission or the Attorney General of the United States has instituted a civil action for violation of section 2 or a regulation promulgated under such section (referred to in this subparagraph as the Federal action), no State attorney general, official, or agency may bring an action under this subsection during the pendency of the Federal action against any defendant named in the complaint in the Federal action for any violation of such section or regulation alleged in such complaint.
A person injured by a section 2 violation or violation of its regulations could sue in state or federal court to stop it, recover damages, or both. Damages could cover actual monetary loss or, if greater, an amount for each violation up to the inflation-adjusted amount referenced in the Federal Trade Commission Act and federal regulations. The bill does not state that dollar amount.
A person injured by an act or practice in violation of section 2 or a regulation promulgated under such section may bring in an appropriate State court or district court of the United States— (A) an action to enjoin the violation; (B) an action to recover damages for actual monetary loss from the violation, or to receive up to the amount specified under section 5(l) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as adjusted for inflation in section 1.98 of title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, in damages for each such violation, whichever is greater; or (C) both such actions.
For willful or knowing violations, a court could increase a private plaintiff's damages to as much as three times the otherwise available amount. A successful plaintiff would be entitled to court-determined costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
If the court finds that the defendant acted willfully or knowingly in committing a violation described in paragraph (1), the court may, in its discretion, increase the amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 times the amount available under paragraph (1)(B).
The court shall award to a prevailing plaintiff in an action under this subsection the costs of such action and reasonable attorney’s fees, as determined by the court.
A private lawsuit would have to begin within three years after the person first discovered, or had a reasonable opportunity to discover, the violation. This remedy would be additional to other available remedies.
An action may be commenced under this subsection not later than 3 years after the date on which the person first discovered or had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.
The remedy provided by this subsection shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the person.
The Federal Trade Commission would have to issue regulations implementing section 2(b)'s platform requirements within 180 days after enactment. Separately, it could issue regulations implementing, interpreting, and enforcing any provision of the Act.
(5) Rulemaking Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate regulations to carry out the requirements of this subsection.
The Commission may promulgate regulations to implement, interpret, and enforce any provisions of this Act.
The term Commission means the Federal Trade Commission.
Sections 2 and 3 would not require platforms to review all content before it is posted or transmitted. The bill also says section 230, the referenced federal liability-protection provision, could not be interpreted to impair enforcement of this Act.
Nothing in sections 2 or 3 may be construed to require a covered platform to monitor all content before the content is posted or transmitted.
(b) Rule of construction on section 230 liability protection Nothing in section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) may be construed to impair enforcement of this Act.
The Act would exempt services functioning primarily as internet service providers, email providers, or data storage providers. It would also exclude content transmitted through a covered platform without being stored there.
This Act does not apply to the following: (1) Interactive computer services that function primarily as internet service providers, email providers, or data storage providers. (2) Content that is transmitted through a covered platform but not stored on the platform.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 29, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on September 16, 2026. This snapshot does not establish any later legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-29T17:09:58Z. 2026-09-16: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-09-16: Introduced in House 2026-09-16: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-16. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents or attachment history of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying disclosures and committee materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains express exemptions from the main regulatory framework. These are identified as carve-outs for scrutiny, without judging their justification or effects.
Services functioning primarily as internet service providers, email providers, or data storage providers would receive an express exemption from the Act. This gives the specified service categories different treatment from otherwise covered platforms under the bill's anti-fraud framework.
This Act does not apply to the following: (1) Interactive computer services that function primarily as internet service providers, email providers, or data storage providers.
A covered platform may not materially contribute to the development of fraudulent content directed at consumers.
Covered platforms would receive a content-specific exception for material they transmit without storing. That exception limits the Act's application according to how the platform handles the content.
This Act does not apply to the following:
(2) Content that is transmitted through a covered platform but not stored on the platform.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 29, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI