Privacy

DATA PROTECTION LAWS IN UNITED STATES

United States privacy law is a complex patchwork of national, state and local privacy laws and regulations. There is no comprehensive national privacy law in the United States. However, the US does have a number of largely sector-specific privacy and data security laws at the federal level, as well as many more at the state (and local) level. In recent years, beginning with California in 2018, states have begun to introduce and enact their own comprehensive privacy laws. Although bipartisan draft bills (e.g., the American Privacy Rights Act of 2024) have been introduced since then, changes in the political climate, industry influence, and the increasing complexity of privacy concerns have stifled efforts of passing an omnibus law. Thus, a comprehensive privacy law on the federal level is not expected to pass any time soon.

Federal and State Privacy Laws and Regulations

Federal laws and regulations include those that apply to financial institutions, telecommunications companies, credit reporting agencies and healthcare providers, as well as driving records, children’s online privacy, telemarketing, email marketing, biometrics, and communications privacy laws. 

There are also a number of state privacy and data security laws that can overlap with federal law(s)—some of these state privacy laws are preempted in part by federal laws, while others are not. Some US states have also privacy and data security laws and regulations that apply across sectors and go beyond requirements imposed by federal laws—such as data security laws, secure destruction, Social Security number privacy, online privacy, biometric information privacy, and data breach notification laws. Generally, these state laws apply to personal information about residents of or activities that occur within each of these states, respectively. Thus, many businesses operating in the United States must comply not only with applicable federal law, but also with numerous state privacy and security laws and regulations.

For example, California alone has more than 25 state privacy and data security laws, including the comprehensive CCPA, which provides definitions and broad individual rights and imposes requirements and restrictions on the collection, use, disclosure, and processing of personal information of CA residents. The CCPA is unique among the existing state comprehensive privacy laws in that, it applies not only to personal information related to consumers but also in the HR and B2B context. Enforcement of the updated CCPA regulations, which were finalized March 29, 2023, commenced on March 29, 2024, by the newly established California Privacy Protection Agency, referred to as the ‘CPPA’ or ‘Agency.’ In September of 2025, the CPPA announced that the California Office of Administrative Law approved regulations covering (1) cybersecurity audits, (2) risk assessments, (3) automated decision-making technology (ADMT), (4) insurance companies, and (5) updates to the existing CCPA Regulations. These supplementing regulations went into effect January 1, 2026. However, businesses have a grace period to come into compliance with certain of the new requirements, including: cybersecurity audits, risk assessments, and new requirements for automated decision-making technologies.

Cybersecurity Audits: businesses required to complete cybersecurity audits must submit their certifications to the CPPA by:

  • April 1, 2028, if the business makes over $100 million;
  • April 1, 2029, if the business makes between $50 million and $100 million; or
  • April 1, 2030, if the business makes less than $50 million.

Risk Assessments: businesses subject to risk assessment requirements must begin compliance by January 1, 2026 and submit to the Agency by April 1, 2028:

  • An attestation that required risk assessments were completed, and
  • A summary of the risk assessment information.

Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT): Businesses that use ADMT to make significant decisions must comply with the relevant requirements starting on January 1, 2027.

The CPPA also enforces the "Delete Act," effective January 1, 2024, which imposes deletion obligations on data brokers, including to:

  • Register with CalPrivacy on an annual basis,
  • Process deletion requests submitted through the DROP system
  • Report the types of information they collect and share, and
  • Undergo audits to make sure they’re following the Delete Act

Non-compliance of the above requirements may lead to penalties and administrative fines.

Consumers may submit a single verifiable request to have their personal information held by all registered data brokers in California deleted via the DROP platform, which is accessible on the CPPA's website and became operational January 1, 2026. The idea is to allow consumers to make a single verifiable deletion request (free of charge) to have their data deleted by data brokers and their associated service providers or contractors, thereby preventing certain 'sales' of their information.

In August 2022, the California legislature passed the California Age-Appropriate Design Code ('CAADC'), which was slated to take effect July 1, 2024, and would apply to companies that meet the definition of “business” under the CCPA and that provide online services that are likely to be accessed by individuals under 18 years of age. However, on September 18, 2023, a California District Court issued an injunction blocking the law from coming into effect on First Amendment grounds. Following an appeal to the Ninth Circuit by the California Attorney General's office, the court on March 12, 2026, issued its latest decision in NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta, partially affirming and partially vacating the district court’s preliminary injunction that had blocked the law’s enforcement. It vacated the preliminary injunction as to this provision and remanded for further consideration. Importantly, the court observed that the age estimation requirement does not, on its face, prevent access to content.  The court left open the question of whether the term “data management practices” in the age estimation provision incorporates the content-related factors from the DPIA requirement (which remains enjoined) or carries its ordinary meaning. This statutory interpretation question will be addressed on remand. Further, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction as to four data use restrictions and the dark patterns prohibition, albeit on vagueness grounds rather than First Amendment grounds. More information on the California Age-Appropriate Design Code is available online.

Similarly, Maryland has enacted the “Kids Code” and Connecticut amended its Consumer Data Protection Act to include similar protections for children’s personal information. Moreover, in January 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) finalized significant changes to the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). While the FTC periodically reviews the COPPA rule, these rule changes are the first amendment to COPPA since 2013. According to the FTC, the final amended rule reflects technological advancements since COPPA was last amended and is intended to enhance online safety for children. More information on the amended rule is available online. Additionally, the FTC published its “Enforcement Policy Statement Promoting the Adoption of Age-Verification Technology,” and stated its intent to initiate a review of the COPPA Rule to address age-verification mechanisms. The combined efforts of federal and state regulators are intended to pave the way for a safer digital landscape and ensure that children's privacy is prioritized in an increasingly connected world.

Beyond California’s CCPA, additional comprehensive state privacy laws have also taken effect, including the

  • Colorado Privacy Act,
  • Connecticut Data Privacy Act (including amendments regulating consumer health data, children’s data, and social media platforms),
  • Delaware Personal Data Privacy Act,
  • Florida Data Privacy and Security Act,
  • Indiana Consumer Data Protection Act,
  • Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act,
  • Kentucky Consumer Data Protection Act,
  • Maryland Online Data Privacy Act,
  • Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act,
  • Montana Consumer Data Privacy Act,
  • Nebraska Data Privacy Act,
  • New Hampshire Consumer Expectation of Privacy Act,
  • New Jersey Personal Data Privacy Act,
  • Oregon Consumer Privacy Act,
  • Rhode Island Data Transparency and Privacy Protection Act,
  • Tennessee Information Protection Act
  • Texas Data Privacy and Security Act
  • Utah Consumer Privacy Act
  • Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act

While not identical, these comprehensive state privacy laws are, with the exception of the CCPA, substantially similar to each other in most respects, but may differ in certain regards, for example, scope, privacy notice disclosures, privacy rights, and certain key definitions. These state laws are also generally inapplicable to personal information collected about, and processed in the context of, employee and business relationships. While the CCPA has some practical similarities with these state laws, it adopts more granular definitions, requirements, and restrictions that vary considerably from these laws, and, notably, also applies to personal information collected from California residents in employment and B2B contexts.

There have also been significant developments in the health data space, beginning in 2023 with Washington passing the landmark My Health My Data Act (MHMD). The law ostensibly applies only to consumer health data, but its exceptionally broad definitions and scope combined with its private right of action may mean its enforcement touches on data many companies may not typically consider “health” data. More information on the MHMD Act is available online. Since MHMD, other states have followed suit—Nevada passed the Nevada Consumer Health Data Privacy Law through senate bill 370, effective March 31, 2024, and Connecticut amended the Consumer Data Privacy Act to include similar provisions for protecting consumer health data, effective October 1, 2023.

Finally, the pace of state privacy legislation has continued to accelerate overall, with the following states also  introducing similar legislation:

  • Georgia
  • Illinois 
  • Maine
  • Massachusetts
  • Michigan
  • New York
  • North Carolina
  • Pennsylvania
  • South Carolina

Enforcement of Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices

In the United States, consumer protection laws, which prohibit unfair and deceptive business practices, provide another avenue for enforcement against businesses for their privacy and security practices.

At the federal level, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) uses its authority to protect consumers against unfair or deceptive trade practices, to take enforcement actions against businesses for materially unfair privacy and data security practices. The FTC uses this authority to, among other things, take enforcement actions and investigate companies for:

  • Failing to implement reasonable data security measures
  • Making materially inaccurate or misleading privacy and security statements, including in privacy policies
  • Failing to abide by applicable industry self-regulatory principles
  • Transferring or attempting to transfer personal information to an acquiring entity in a bankruptcy or M&A transaction, in a manner not expressly disclosed on the applicable consumer privacy policy
  • Violating consumer privacy rights by collecting, using, sharing or failing to adequately protect consumer information, in violation of standards established in their prior enforcement precedents  

Many state attorneys general have similar enforcement authority over unfair and deceptive business practices, including failure to implement reasonable security measures and violations of consumer privacy rights that harm consumers in their states. State attorneys general also sometimes work together on enforcement actions against companies for actions that broadly affect the consumers of multiple states (such as data breaches). 

Key Enforcement Trends and Areas of Privacy Class Action

Privacy class actions continue to be a significant risk area in the United States, including in the context of biometric privacy (under the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act), text messaging (under the federal Telephone Consumer Privacy Act) and call recording, wiretapping and related claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), and Shine The Light, as well as other state laws. For example, on January 26, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Salazar v. Paramount Global to clarify the scope of the VPPA and resolve a circuit split on the question of how “consumer” is defined under the law.  The Court is likely to schedule oral argument in the upcoming 2026-2027 term. Further under the CCPA, data breaches due to inadequate security measures, allow for a private right of action.

Online monitoring and targeting activities—including via cookies, pixels, chat bots, and so-called “session replay” tools—continue to be an area of particular focus in the eyes of both regulators and plaintiff’s attorneys. Similarly, regulators put a heightened focus on compliance with honoring opt-out of 'selling/sharing for targeted advertising purposes, including via global opt-out signals and related to selling and sharing via non-automated means, ADMT transparency, as well as data-broker registration since the DROP platform became operational in January of 2026.

These enforcement and litigation trends highlight the evolving landscape of privacy enforcement and litigation, emphasizing the need for businesses to stay current in order to adapt and comply with stringent privacy and data protection regulations to avoid legal repercussions and reputational harm.

Existing Federal Regulation of Social Media Platforms and Certain Content

Distribution of Sexually Explicit Material

By statute, Congress has prohibited the knowing distribution of certain material in interstate or foreign commerce, including over the internet. Federal law has long criminalized the distribution of "obscene" material, a subset of pornographic content. Because sexual expression is generally protected under the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has adopted a definition of obscenity that exempts material with serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Federal law also prohibits accessing or distributing child sexual abuse material (CSAM), referred to in statute as "child pornography." Material that qualifies as obscenity or child pornography is considered "unprotected speech," meaning the government can prohibit it, subject to certain First Amendment limits. In 2002, the Supreme Court invalidated on free speech grounds an amendment to the CSAM statute prohibiting material that "appears to" depict a minor engaged in sexual conduct, because it would have prohibited even non-obscene movies with adult actors. The case may have implications for images generated or altered with artificial intelligence.

A 2022 federal law authorizes individuals whose intimate images were disclosed without their consent to sue the disclosing party in federal court. Many cases involving these claims are in the early stages, with no reported rulings on free speech defenses as of the date of this writing. Some courts have rejected First Amendment challenges to similar state laws. Those courts ruled that while the laws restricted protected expression, they served compelling government interests without burdening too much protected speech.

Data Protection

Congress has enacted statutes that regulate data collected by certain industries or data that fall within certain categories. For example, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act imposes data protection obligations on financial institutions, and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act regulates the online collection and use of information about children younger than 13. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission sometimes brings enforcement actions alleging that companies' data protection practices constitute "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." Congress has not enacted a comprehensive data protection law.

Legal Protections for Hosting or Restricting Speech

The First Amendment protects the right to create, circulate, or receive content online by constraining the government's ability to regulate this activity. The Supreme Court has also recognized a right of editorial control when private platforms choose whether or how to publish others' speech. In addition, courts have interpreted Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 to bar liability for publishing, promoting, restricting, and sometimes even editing third-party content. Section 230 does not bar liability if a social media platform helps develop content, and it contains exceptions allowing certain types of lawsuits.

State Regulation of Social Media

Some states have adopted laws regulating social media platforms and online content. As discussed below, courts have enjoined (i.e., barred) enforcement of some of these laws while legal challenges to them are litigated.

Some laws have attempted to address the content hosted online. For instance, the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (CAADCA) requires covered sites to assess and mitigate the risk their product will expose children to harmful content. Florida and Texas have enacted laws restricting online platforms' ability to moderate user content. Texas's law, for example, prohibits covered platforms from censoring users based on viewpoint.

Other state laws have focused not on specific content moderation decisions but on broader questions of who can access websites and how content is delivered to users. Many of these laws are aimed at protecting children. Some states have adopted laws requiring social media sites to verify a user's age and obtain parental consent. Other state laws require age verification only for sites with a certain amount of sexually explicit content, or limit the use of features that may be addictive or otherwise harmful.

Some states have enacted data privacy laws that apply broadly to the online collection or processing of personal data. These laws often create individual rights to limit how companies use personal data, such as a right to opt out of the use of personal data for targeted advertising.

Considerations for Congress

Past policy discussions have centered on whether and how to regulate social media platforms and the user-generated content they host and distribute. Bills in the 118th Congress would have amended Section 230, regulated platforms' content moderation procedures, created transparency requirements, and supported third-party research of social media platforms. For example, the Kids Online Safety Act—versions of which were passed by the Senate as part of the Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act in July 2024 (S. 2073) and ordered to be reported to the House in September 2024 (H.R. 7891)—would have imposed a "duty of care" and other regulations on certain online platforms reasonably likely to be used by minors.

First Amendment Litigation

Courts have enjoined some state laws on First Amendment grounds, preventing them from going into effect. The Supreme Court weighed in on the Florida and Texas content moderation laws in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 2383 (2024), holding that some applications of the laws affect platforms' protected rights to make editorial decisions about the content they display. The Court opined that when Facebook and YouTube decide which third-party content to display and how to organize that content, they are making constitutionally protected expressive choices. Other laws limiting platforms' ability to host or exclude speech could infringe this right of editorial control.

Apart from editorial control concerns, courts may apply heightened constitutional scrutiny to laws that target specific types of online content. This heightened scrutiny makes it more difficult for the government to establish that a challenged law is constitutional. Specifically, courts usually consider a content-based law—one that applies to speech based on its subject matter, topic, or viewpoint—to be presumptively unconstitutional. As mentioned, however, the government generally can prohibit so-called "unprotected" categories of speech such as obscenity. In January, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, involving a Texas age-verification requirement for certain websites. Because the law is aimed at protecting minors from sexually explicit content, a lower court held that it is not subject to heightened scrutiny and is constitutional. The parties challenging that ruling argue that the law unconstitutionally burdens adults' right to access non-obscene sexual expression online.

Disclosure requirements may be subject to a different constitutional analysis. Federal appeals courts largely upheld disclosure provisions in Texas's and Florida's laws after evaluating them under a lower level of constitutional scrutiny that applies to commercial speech. In contrast, a different federal appeals court concluded California's CAADCA violated the First Amendment by requiring covered businesses to report on the risk that their services expose children to harmful content. The court held this requirement reached beyond commercial speech.

Laws regulating content moderation procedures without focusing on the subject matter or ideas in that content might trigger a lower standard of constitutional review. Laws that are content neutral—that do not turn on a particular topic or viewpoint—are usually subject to a less demanding First Amendment test that is easier for the government to satisfy.

Policy Considerations

In addition to constitutional considerations, policy considerations for Congress may include (1) addressing concerns regarding social media platforms and content, such as the spread of harmful content and misinformation and data privacy; (2) ensuring a viable consumer-focused tech sector driven by innovation and competitiveness; and (3) addressing the question of federal regulatory authority over social media platforms.

Congress may weigh a range of options to address concerns. For example, Congress may continue to support the current mix of federal and state regulation and industry self-regulation. Congress may also exercise oversight of existing regulatory frameworks, conducting investigations and hearings on the industry practice and agency enforcement. Congress might incentivize social media companies to establish voluntary or collaborative rules and standards as a response to the pressure of stakeholders, the public, or potential litigation. Congress may assess court opinions in litigations related to social media and determine whether Congress should provide legislative solutions. Lastly, Congress may enact legislation that would provide specific regulatory authority to federal agencies. If Congress chooses to legislate, considerations may include the following:

  • Covered Entities. Whether to cover entities operating large social media platforms (e.g., those with a certain number of active users or specific revenue thresholds), some other subset of platforms, all social media platforms, or all online platforms.
  • Content Moderation. Whether to prohibit content moderation, require moderation of defined harmful content, or provide flexibility regarding the choice of moderated content. Congress might consider whether to amend Section 230, for example, by reforming liability protections for social media platforms' content moderation practices. Congress might consider imposing transparency and accountability requirements, such as disclosing social media algorithms and content moderation practices. Congress might also address users' rights regarding what content they see.
  • Enforcement. Whether an existing agency (e.g., the Federal Trade Commission or Federal Communications Commission) or a new agency would enforce new requirements established in law. Congress might also consider whether to include a private right of action allowing lawsuits for violations of the law.

Disclaimer:
These documents were prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Florida Status Laws:

501.1736 Social media use for minors.

(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Account holder” means a resident who opens an account or creates a profile or is identified by the social media platform by a unique identifier while using or accessing a social media platform when the social media platform knows or has reason to believe the resident is located in this state.
(b) “Daily active users” means the number of unique users in the United States who used the online forum, website, or application at least 80 percent of the days during the previous 12 months, or, if the online forum, website, or application did not exist during the previous 12 months, the number of unique users in the United States who used the online forum, website, or application at least 80 percent of the days during the previous month.
(c) “Department” means the Department of Legal Affairs.
(d) “Resident” means a person who lives in this state for more than 6 months of the year.
(e) “Social media platform” means an online forum, website, or application that satisfies each of the following criteria:
1. Allows users to upload content or view the content or activity of other users;
2. Ten percent or more of the daily active users who are younger than 16 years of age spend on average 2 hours per day or longer on the online forum, website, or application on the days when using the online forum, website, or application during the previous 12 months or, if the online forum, website, or application did not exist during the previous 12 months, during the previous month;
3. Employs algorithms that analyze user data or information on users to select content for users; and
4. Has any of the following addictive features:
a. Infinite scrolling, which means either:
(I) Continuously loading content, or content that loads as the user scrolls down the page without the need to open a separate page; or
(II) Seamless content, or the use of pages with no visible or apparent end or page breaks.
b. Push notifications or alerts sent by the online forum, website, or application to inform a user about specific activities or events related to the user’s account.
c. Displays personal interactive metrics that indicate the number of times other users have clicked a button to indicate their reaction to content or have shared or reposted the content.
d. Auto-play video or video that begins to play without the user first clicking on the video or on a play button for that video.
e. Live-streaming or a function that allows a user or advertiser to broadcast live video content in real-time.

The term does not include an online service, website, or application where the exclusive function is e-mail or direct messaging consisting of text, photographs, pictures, images, or videos shared only between the sender and the recipients, without displaying or posting publicly or to other users not specifically identified as the recipients by the sender.

(2)(a) A social media platform shall prohibit a minor who is younger than 14 years of age from entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder.
(b) A social media platform shall:
1. Terminate any account held by an account holder younger than 14 years of age, including accounts that the social media platform treats or categorizes as belonging to an account holder who is likely younger than 14 years of age for purposes of targeting content or advertising, and provide 90 days for an account holder to dispute such termination. Termination must be effective upon the expiration of the 90 days if the account holder fails to effectively dispute the termination.
2. Allow an account holder younger than 14 years of age to request to terminate the account. Termination must be effective within 5 business days after such request.
3. Allow the confirmed parent or guardian of an account holder younger than 14 years of age to request that the minor’s account be terminated. Termination must be effective within 10 business days after such request.
4. Permanently delete all personal information held by the social media platform relating to the terminated account, unless there are legal requirements to maintain such information.
(3)(a) A social media platform shall prohibit a minor who is 14 or 15 years of age from entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder, unless the minor’s parent or guardian provides consent for the minor to become an account holder.
(b) A social media platform shall:
1. Terminate any account held by an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age, including accounts that the social media platform treats or categorizes as belonging to an account holder who is likely 14 or 15 years of age for purposes of targeting content or advertising, if the account holder’s parent or guardian has not provided consent for the minor to create or maintain the account. The social media platform shall provide 90 days for an account holder to dispute such termination. Termination must be effective upon the expiration of the 90 days if the account holder fails to effectively dispute the termination.
2. Allow an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to request to terminate the account. Termination must be effective within 5 business days after such request.
3. Allow the confirmed parent or guardian of an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to request that the minor’s account be terminated. Termination must be effective within 10 business days after such request.
4. Permanently delete all personal information held by the social media platform relating to the terminated account, unless there are legal requirements to maintain such information.
(4) If a court enjoins the enforcement of subsection (3) or would otherwise enjoin enforcement of any other provision of this section due to subsection (3), then subsection (3) shall be severed, and the following shall come into effect:
(a) A social media platform shall prohibit a minor who is 14 or 15 years of age from entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder.
(b) A social media platform shall:
1. Terminate any account held by an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age, including accounts that the social media platform treats or categorizes as belonging to an account holder who is likely 14 or 15 years of age for purposes of targeting content or advertising, and provide 90 days for an account holder to dispute such termination. Termination must be effective upon the expiration of 90 days if the account holder fails to effectively dispute the termination.
2. Allow an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to request to terminate the account. Termination must be effective within 5 business days after such request.
3. Allow the confirmed parent or guardian of an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to request that the minor’s account be terminated. Termination must be effective within 10 business days after such request.
4. Permanently delete all personal information held by the social media platform relating to the terminated account, unless there are legal requirements to maintain such information.
(5) Any knowing or reckless violation of subsection (2), subsection (3), or, if in effect, subsection (4) is deemed an unfair and deceptive trade practice actionable under part II of this chapter solely by the department against a social media platform. If the department has reason to believe that a social media platform is in violation of subsection (2), subsection (3), or, if in effect, subsection (4), the department, as the enforcing authority, may bring an action against such platform for an unfair or deceptive act or practice. For the purpose of bringing an action pursuant to this section, ss. 501.211 and 501.212 do not apply. In addition to other remedies under part II of this chapter, the department may collect a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation and reasonable attorney fees and court costs. When the social media platform’s failure to comply with subsection (2), subsection (3), or, if in effect, subsection (4) is a consistent pattern of knowing or reckless conduct, punitive damages may be assessed against the social media platform.
(6)(a) A social media platform that knowingly or recklessly violates subsection (2), subsection (3), or, if in effect, subsection (4) is liable to the minor account holder, including court costs and reasonable attorney fees as ordered by the court. Claimants may be awarded up to $10,000 in damages.
(b) A civil action for a claim under this subsection must be brought within 1 year from the date the complainant knew, or reasonably should have known, of the alleged violation.
(c) Any action brought under this subsection may only be brought on behalf of a minor account holder.
(7) For purposes of bringing an action under this section, a social media platform that allows a minor account holder younger than 14 years of age or a minor account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to create an account on such platform is considered to be both engaged in substantial and not isolated activities within this state and operating, conducting, engaging in, or carrying on a business and doing business in this state, and is therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state.
(8) If a social media platform allows an account holder to use the social media platform, the parties have entered into a contract.
(9) This section does not preclude any other available remedy at law or equity.
(10)(a) If, by its own inquiry or as a result of complaints, the department has reason to believe that an entity or person has engaged in, or is engaging in, an act or practice that violates this section, the department may administer oaths and affirmations, subpoena witnesses or matter, and collect evidence. Within 5 days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, after the service of a subpoena or at any time before the return date specified therein, whichever is longer, the party served may file in the circuit court in the county in which it resides or in which it transacts business and serve upon the enforcing authority a petition for an order modifying or setting aside the subpoena. The petitioner may raise any objection or privilege which would be available upon service of such subpoena in a civil action. The subpoena shall inform the party served of its rights under this subsection.
(b) If the matter that the department seeks to obtain by subpoena is located outside the state, the entity or person subpoenaed may make it available to the department or its representative to examine the matter at the place where it is located. The department may designate representatives, including officials of the state in which the matter is located, to inspect the matter on its behalf and may respond to similar requests from officials of other states.
(c) Upon failure of an entity or person without lawful excuse to obey a subpoena and upon reasonable notice to all persons affected, the department may apply to the circuit court for an order compelling compliance.
(d) The department may request that an entity or person that refuses to comply with a subpoena on the ground that testimony or matter may incriminate the entity or person be ordered by the court to provide the testimony or matter. Except in a prosecution for perjury, an entity or individual that complies with a court order to provide testimony or matter after asserting a valid privilege against self-incrimination shall not have the testimony or matter so provided, or evidence derived therefrom, received against the entity or person in any criminal investigation or proceeding.
(e) Any entity or person upon whom a subpoena is served pursuant to this section shall comply with the terms thereof unless otherwise provided by order of the court. Any entity or person that fails to appear with the intent to avoid, evade, or prevent compliance in whole or in part with any investigation under this part or who removes from any place, conceals, withholds, mutilates, alters, or destroys, or by any other means falsifies any documentary material in the possession, custody, or control of any entity or person subject to any such subpoena, or knowingly conceals any relevant information with the intent to avoid, evade, or prevent compliance shall be liable for a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 per week in violation, reasonable attorney fees, and costs.
(11)(a) All information held by the department pursuant to a notification of a violation of this section or an investigation of a violation of this section is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, until such time as the investigation is completed or ceases to be active. This exemption shall be construed in conformity with s. 119.071(2)(c).
(b) During an active investigation, information made confidential and exempt pursuant to paragraph (a) may be disclosed by the department:
1. In the furtherance of its official duties and responsibilities;
2. For print, publication, or broadcast if the department determines that such release would assist in notifying the public or locating or identifying a person that the department believes to be a victim of an improper use or disposal of customer records, except that information made confidential and exempt by paragraph (c) may not be released pursuant to this subparagraph; or
3. To another governmental entity in the furtherance of its official duties and responsibilities.
(c) Upon completion of an investigation or once an investigation ceases to be active, the following information held by the department shall remain confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution:
1. Information that is otherwise confidential or exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. Personal identifying information.
3. A computer forensic report.
4. Information that would otherwise reveal weaknesses in the data security of a social media platform.
5. Information that would disclose the proprietary information of a social media platform.
(d) For purposes of this section, the term “proprietary information” means information that:
1. Is owned or controlled by the social media platform.
2. Is intended to be private and is treated by the social media platform as private because disclosure would harm the social media platform or its business operations.
3. Has not been disclosed except as required by law or a private agreement that provides that the information will not be released to the public.
4. Is not publicly available or otherwise readily ascertainable through proper means from another source in the same configuration as received by the department.
5. Reveals competitive interests, the disclosure of which would impair the competitive advantage of the social media platform that is the subject of the information.
(e) This subsection is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2029, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.
(12) The department may adopt rules to implement this section.

 

History.s. 1, ch. 2024-42; s. 1, ch. 2024-54.
 

 

State Laws of Social Media by civil Federal laws in United States of America:

State laws for social media

As of July 2026: at least 20 states have enacted laws addressing minors’ social media access, addictive feeds, age-appropriate design, or closely related online-safety obligations but litigation has left the landscape split between (a) laws currently enforceable, (b) laws enjoined, and (c) laws enacted but not yet in force (or awaiting rulemaking). The current overall trend is that rapid an evolving legislative momentum is outpacing constitutional clarity & associated challenges.

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this article is accurate, neither its authors nor The AVPA Ltd. accepts responsibility for any errors or omissions. The content of this article is for general information only, and is not intended to constitute or be relied upon as legal advice.

Information is believed to be correct as of (May 2026)

1.   Colorado HB24-1136 Currently Injuncted
2.   Connecticut Connecticut General Assembly, SB 3 1st October 2024
3.   Texas HB 18 1st September 2024 enjoined pending appeal
4.   Maryland Consumer Protection – Online Products and Services – Data of Children (Maryland Kids Code), HB603

 

 

Consumer Protection – Online Products and Services – Data of Children (Maryland Kids Code), SB571

1st October 2024

 

 

 

 1st October 2024

5.   Utah HB 464

 

 

SB 194

1st October 2024

 

 

1st  October 2024

6.   Mississippi Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act, HB 1126 17th April 2025
7.   Minnesota MN HF3488 1st  July 2025
8.   Virginia SB 854

Preliminarily enjoined (Feb 2026) with appeal active

9.   Nebraska LB 383

 

LB 504 – AADC Act

Partially enjoined

In Effect Jan. 1, 2026 with penalties beginning July 1, 2026

10.  Florida HB 3 Largely enforceable pending appeal with merits still to be resolved
11.  Georgia SB 351 Currently Injuncted (part of broader Netchoice litigation cluster)
12.  Tennessee Public Chapter 899 In force; appellate proceedings active as of Feb 2026
13.  Arkansas SB 396

 

Act 900

Act 901

Permanently Enjoined

 

Preliminarily Enjoined

Preliminarily Enjoined

14.  Ohio Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 1349.09 Currently Injuncted
15.  New York New York SAFE for Kids Act Rulemaking still ongoing; not yet in force
16.  Louisiana Act 456 Permanently Enjoined
17. California

SB 976 – Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act

 

AB 1043 – Digital Age Assurance Act

 

AB-2273 – California Age Appropriate Design Code Act

Phased implementation (rulemaking underway); major age-assurance obligation begins Jan 1, 2027; partially litigated

 

Effective 2027

 

Partially enforceable following Ninth Circuit ruling; key provisions remain enjoined; ongoing litigation

 

18. South Carolina H3402- Age Appropriate Design Code Act

Signed February 5, 2026 with immediate effect. NetChoice complaint filed Feb. 9, 2026; PI motion filed Mar. 9, 2026

19. Vermont

S69 / Act 63 – Vermont AADC Act

Signed June 12, 2025, Effective January 1, 2027

20. Idaho HB 542 – Stop Harms from Addictive Social Media Act Effective July 1, 2026

1st July, 2023 (Minors’ Data – October 1, 2024)

Connecticut SB 3: Imposes minors-focused obligations on “social media platforms” (as defined in SB 3) within Connecticut’s privacy framework, including enhanced rights/controls for minors and related platform obligations; it is not a universal “parental-consent-to-open-an-account” statute.

1st June 2024

HB24-1136: Certain social media platforms must display a large pop-up to users under 18 when the users open the platform for the first time that day. The platforms must then display another warning every 30 minutes. The law is currently stayed, following a recent challenge from NetChoice.

1st September 2024

Texas HB 18: requires digital service providers such as social media platforms to get consent from a parent or guardian before entering into an agreement with minors younger than 18, including to create an account. (Currently enjoined pending appeal.)

1st October 2024

Maryland Kids Code: requires social media platforms requires covered online products/services reasonably likely to be accessed by children to set default high privacy settings for users under 16, ban the collection of children’s data for personalised content and ensure age-appropriate design. (In effect; NetChoice litigation is ongoing and a motion-to-dismiss was denied, but no court order enjoining the Act was identified in current checks.)

Utah HB 464 & SB 194: The Social Media Regulation Act requires parental consent for minors to create social media accounts and mandates age verification by social media companies. It also restricts social media use between 10:30 PM and 6:30 AM for users under 18 without parental consent​. (Currently enjoined; appeal pending.)

17th April 2025

Mississippi Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act, HB 1126: Requires social media platforms to verify users’ ages via “commercially reasonable efforts,” obtain parental consent for minors, limit data collection and targeted advertising for under-18 users, and implement strategies to shield minors from harmful content. (Enforcement allowed to proceed during litigation but merits remain unresolved)

1st July 2025

Minnesota MN HF3488: Sets rules for compensating minors who contribute to online content creation. It requires content creators to keep records and set aside earnings for minors, and it allows for legal action against violators. Also mandates the removal of content featuring minors upon request.

1st January 2026

Virginia SB 854: Requires social media platforms to determine if users are under 16 and limit minors to one hour per day unless parents adjust settings; violations subject to civil penalties. (preliminarily enjoined Feb. 27, 2026; appeal/litigation active)

1st July 2026

Nebraska LB 383: Requires social media platforms to verify users’ ages and obtain parental consent before allowing minors to create accounts, with parents granted rights to monitor activity and control settings.

February 2, 2026

South Carolina H3402: Age Appropriate Design Code Act signed with immediate effect and an immediate court challenge

TBC

New York SAFE for Kids Act: Requires social media platforms to determine users’ ages and gain parental consent before providing minors with algorithmic feeds, and restricts overnight notifications to children without consent. (Effective date is tied to final NY AG regulations; rulemaking was still in progress as of late 2025.)

Florida HB 3: Requires social media platforms to verify users’ ages, obtain parental consent for users under 18, protect minors’ personal data, and limit their exposure to harmful content. (A district-court preliminary injunction issued in June 2025 was later stayed on appeal; key provisions are currently enforceable pending continued litigation.)

Tennessee Public Chapter 899: Requires social media companies to verify the age of users attempting to create or maintain accounts. It mandates that platforms obtain parental consent for minors under 18 and enforces stricter privacy and safety measures for these users. The law aims to protect minors from potential online harms by ensuring that social media companies comply with these new regulations​. (In force; appellate proceedings are active as of Feb 2026.)

Georgia SB 351: Known as the “Protecting Georgia’s Children on Social Media Act of 2024,” requires social media platforms to implement age verification processes for users, mandates parental consent for minors to create accounts, and restricts social media use in schools. (Preliminarily enjoined June 26, 2025.)

Louisiana Act 456: Requires social media platforms to impose limitations and restrictions on certain accounts, implement age verification for account holders, and obtain parental consent. Permanently enjoined (Dec 2025)

California SB 976: Regulates algorithmic “addic­tive feeds” provided to minors rather than restricting account access. Social media platforms may not provide an addictive feed to a minor unless they have verifiable parental consent or reasonably determine the user is not a minor. The law also restricts late-night notifications and requires safety controls for minors. California DOJ rulemaking is underway, and platforms must implement age-determination measures by January 1, 2027. Portions of the law have been litigated, but core provisions remain in effect.

 

There have also been bills introduced attempting to regulate “addictive feeds.”: These propose to limit algorithmic feeds for minors. These include bills in Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, North Carolina, Virginia, and Washington.

 

PLEASE NOTE This page summarises current law and proposals and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult independent legal advisers before making compliance decisions.

Music Copyright Laws:

Subchapter A — Definitions

1001. Definitions

As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) A “digital audio copied recording” is a reproduction in a digital recording format of a digital musical recording, whether that reproduction is made directly from another digital musical recording or indirectly from a transmission.

(2) A “digital audio interface device” is any machine or device that is designed specifically to communicate digital audio information and related interface data to a digital audio recording device through a nonprofessional interface.

(3) A “digital audio recording device” is any machine or device of a type commonly distributed to individuals for use by individuals, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine or device, the digital recording function of which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, making a digital audio copied recording for private use, except for—

(A) professional model products, and

(B) dictation machines, answering machines, and other audio recording equipment that is designed and marketed primarily for the creation of sound recordings resulting from the fixation of nonmusical sounds.

(4) (A) A “digital audio recording medium” is any material object in a form commonly distributed for use by individuals, that is primarily marketed or most commonly used by consumers for the purpose of making digital audio copied recordings by use of a digital audio recording device.

(B) Such term does not include any material object—

(i) that embodies a sound recording at the time it is first distributed by the importer or manufacturer; or

(ii) that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases.

(5) (A) A “digital musical recording” is a material object—

(i) in which are fixed, in a digital recording format, only sounds, and material, statements, or instructions incidental to those fixed sounds, if any, and

(ii) from which the sounds and material can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

(B) A “digital musical recording” does not include a material object—

(i) in which the fixed sounds consist entirely of spoken word recordings, or

(ii) in which one or more computer programs are fixed, except that a digital musical recording may contain statements or instructions constituting the fixed sounds and incidental material, and statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in order to bring about the perception, reproduction, or communication of the fixed sounds and incidental material.

(C) For purposes of this paragraph—

(i) a “spoken word recording” is a sound recording in which are fixed only a series of spoken words, except that the spoken words may be accompanied by incidental musical or other sounds, and

(ii) the term “incidental” means related to and relatively minor by comparison.

(6) “Distribute” means to sell, lease, or assign a product to consumers in the United States, or to sell, lease, or assign a product in the United States for ultimate transfer to consumers in the United States.

(7) An “interested copyright party” is—

(A) the owner of the exclusive right under section 106(1) of this title to reproduce a sound recording of a musical work that has been embodied in a digital musical recording or analog musical recording lawfully made under this title that has been distributed;

(B) the legal or beneficial owner of, or the person that controls, the right to reproduce in a digital musical recording or analog musical recording a musical work that has been embodied in a digital musical recording or analog musical recording lawfully made under this title that has been distributed;

(C) a featured recording artist who performs on a sound recording that has been distributed; or

(D) any association or other organization—

(i) representing persons specified in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C), or

(ii) engaged in licensing rights in musical works to music users on behalf of writers and publishers.

(8) To “manufacture” means to produce or assemble a product in the United States. A “manufacturer” is a person who manufactures.

(9) A “music publisher” is a person that is authorized to license the reproduction of a particular musical work in a sound recording.

(10) A “professional model product” is an audio recording device that is designed, manufactured, marketed, and intended for use by recording professionals in the ordinary course of a lawful business, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary of Commerce shall establish by regulation.

(11) The term “serial copying” means the duplication in a digital format of a copyrighted musical work or sound recording from a digital reproduction of a digital musical recording. The term “digital reproduction of a digital musical recording” does not include a digital musical recording as distributed, by authority of the copyright owner, for ultimate sale to consumers.

(12) The “transfer price” of a digital audio recording device or a digital audio recording medium—

(A) is, subject to subparagraph (B)—

(i) in the case of an imported product, the actual entered value at United States Customs (exclusive of any freight, insurance, and applicable duty), and

(ii) in the case of a domestic product, the manufacturer’s transfer price (FOB the manufacturer, and exclusive of any direct sales taxes or excise taxes incurred in connection with the sale); and

(B) shall, in a case in which the transferor and transferee are related entities or within a single entity, not be less than a reasonable arms-length price under the principles of the regulations adopted pursuant to section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or any successor provision to such section.

(13) A “writer” is the composer or lyricist of a particular musical work.

Subchapter B — Copying Controls

1002. Incorporation of copying controls

(a) Prohibition on Importation, Manufacture, and Distribution.— No person shall import, manufacture, or distribute any digital audio recording device or digital audio interface device that does not conform to—

(1) the Serial Copy Management System;

(2) a system that has the same functional characteristics as the Serial Copy Management System and requires that copyright and generation status information be accurately sent, received, and acted upon between devices using the system’s method of serial copying regulation and devices using the Serial Copy Management System; or

(3) any other system certified by the Secretary of Commerce as prohibiting unauthorized serial copying.

(b) Development of Verification Procedure.—The Secretary of Commerce shall establish a procedure to verify, upon the petition of an interested party, that a system meets the standards set forth in subsection (a)(2).

(c) Prohibition on Circumvention of the System.—No person shall import, manufacture, or distribute any device, or offer or perform any service, the primary purpose or effect of which is to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or otherwise circumvent any program or circuit which implements, in whole or in part, a system described in subsection (a).

(d) Encoding of Information on Digital Musical Recordings.—

(1) Prohibition on encoding inaccurate information.—No person shall encode a digital musical recording of a sound recording with inaccurate information relating to the category code, copyright status, or generation status of the source material for the recording.

(2) Encoding of copyright status not required.—Nothing in this chapter requires any person engaged in the importation or manufacture of digital musical recordings to encode any such digital musical recording with respect to its copyright status.

(e) Information Accompanying Transmission in Digital Format.— Any person who transmits or otherwise communicates to the public any sound recording in digital format is not required under this chapter to transmit or otherwise communicate the information relating to the copyright status of the sound recording. Any such person who does transmit or otherwise communicate such copyright status information shall transmit or communicate such information accurately.

Subchapter C — Royalty Payments

1003. Obligation to make royalty payments

(a) Prohibition on Importation and Manufacture.—No person shall import into and distribute, or manufacture and distribute, any digital audio recording device or digital audio recording medium unless such person records the notice specified by this section and subsequently deposits the statements of account and applicable royalty payments for such device or medium specified in section 1004.

(b) Filing of Notice.—The importer or manufacturer of any digital audio recording device or digital audio recording medium, within a product category or utilizing a technology with respect to which such manufacturer or importer has not previously filed a notice under this subsection, shall file with the Register of Copyrights a notice with respect to such device or medium, in such form and content as the Register shall prescribe by regulation.

(c) Filing of Quarterly and Annual Statements of Account.—

(1) Generally.—Any importer or manufacturer that distributes any digital audio recording device or digital audio recording medium that it manufactured or imported shall file with the Register of Copyrights, in such form and content as the Register shall prescribe by regulation, such quarterly and annual statements of account with respect to such distribution as the Register shall prescribe by regulation.

(2) Certification, verification, and confidentiality.—Each such statement shall be certified as accurate by an authorized officer or principal of the importer or manufacturer. The Register shall issue regulations to provide for the verification and audit of such statements and to protect the confidentiality of the information contained in such statements. Such regulations shall provide for the disclosure, in confidence, of such statements to interested copyright parties.

(3) Royalty payments.—Each such statement shall be accompanied by the royalty payments specified in section 1004.

 

 

1004. Royalty payments2

(a) Digital Audio Recording Devices.—

(1) Amount of payment.—The royalty payment due under section 1003 for each digital audio recording device imported into and distributed in the United States, or manufactured and distributed in the United States, shall be 2 percent of the transfer price. Only the first person to manufacture and distribute or import and distribute such device shall be required to pay the royalty with respect to such device.

(2) Calculation for devices distributed with other devices.— With respect to a digital audio recording device first distributed in combination with one or more devices, either as a physically integrated unit or as separate components, the royalty payment shall be calculated as follows:

(A) If the digital audio recording device and such other devices are part of a physically integrated unit, the royalty payment shall be based on the transfer price of the unit, but shall be reduced by any royalty payment made on any digital audio recording device included within the unit that was not first distributed in combination with the unit.

(B) If the digital audio recording device is not part of a physically integrated unit and substantially similar devices have been distributed separately at any time during the preceding 4 calendar quarters, the royalty payment shall be based on the average transfer price of such devices during those 4 quarters.

(C) If the digital audio recording device is not part of a physically integrated unit and substantially similar devices have not been distributed separately at any time during the preceding 4 calendar quarters, the royalty payment shall be based on a constructed price reflecting the proportional value of such device to the combination as a whole.

(3) Limits on royalties.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1) or (2), the amount of the royalty payment for each digital audio recording device shall not be less than $1 nor more than the royalty maximum. The royalty maximum shall be $8 per device, except that in the case of a physically integrated unit containing more than 1 digital audio recording device, the royalty maximum for such unit shall be $12. During the 6th year after the effective date of this chapter, and not more than once each year thereafter, any interested copyright party may petition the Copyright Royalty Judges to increase the royalty maximum and, if more than 20 percent of the royalty payments are at the relevant royalty maximum, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall prospectively increase such royalty maximum with the goal of having no more than 10 percent of such payments at the new royalty maximum; however the amount of any such increase as a percentage of the royalty maximum shall in no event exceed the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index during the period under review.

(b) Digital Audio Recording Media.—The royalty payment due under section 1003 for each digital audio recording medium imported into and distributed in the United States, or manufactured and distributed in the United States, shall be 3 percent of the transfer price. Only the first person to manufacture and distribute or import and distribute such medium shall be required to pay the royalty with respect to such medium.

 

 

1005. Deposit of royalty payments and deduction of expenses3

The Register of Copyrights shall receive all royalty payments deposited under this chapter and, after deducting the reasonable costs incurred by the Copyright Office under this chapter, shall deposit the balance in the Treasury of the United States as offsetting receipts, in such manner as the Secretary of the Treasury directs. All funds held by the Secretary of the Treasury shall be invested in interest-bearing United States securities for later distribution with interest under section 1007. The Register may, in the Register’s discretion, 4 years after the close of any calendar year, close out the royalty payments account for that calendar year, and may treat any funds remaining in such account and any subsequent deposits that would otherwise be attributable to that calendar year as attributable to the succeeding calendar year.

 

 

1006. Entitlement to royalty payments4

(a) Interested Copyright Parties.—The royalty payments deposited pursuant to section 1005 shall, in accordance with the procedures specified in section 1007, be distributed to any interested copyright party—

(1) whose musical work or sound recording has been—

(A) embodied in a digital musical recording or an analog musical recording lawfully made under this title that has been distributed, and

(B) distributed in the form of digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings or disseminated to the public in transmissions, during the period to which such payments pertain; and

(2) who has filed a claim under section 1007.

(b) Allocation of Royalty Payments to Groups.—The royalty payments shall be divided into 2 funds as follows:

(1) The sound recordings fund.—66⅔ percent of the royalty payments shall be allocated to the Sound Recordings Fund. 2⅝ percent of the royalty payments allocated to the Sound Recordings Fund shall be placed in an escrow account managed by an independent administrator jointly appointed by the interested copyright parties described in section 1001(7)(A) and the American Federation of Musicians (or any successor entity) to be distributed to nonfeatured musicians (whether or not members of the American Federation of Musicians or any successor entity) who have performed on sound recordings distributed in the United States. 1⅜ percent of the royalty payments allocated to the Sound Recordings Fund shall be placed in an escrow account managed by an independent administrator jointly appointed by the interested copyright parties described in section 1001(7)(A) and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (or any successor entity) to be distributed to nonfeatured vocalists (whether or not members of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists or any successor entity) who have performed on sound recordings distributed in the United States. 40 percent of the remaining royalty payments in the Sound Recordings Fund shall be distributed to the interested copyright parties described in section 1001(7)(C), and 60 percent of such remaining royalty payments shall be distributed to the interested copyright parties described in section 1001(7)(A).

(2) The Musical Works Fund.—

(A) 33⅓ percent of the royalty payments shall be allocated to the Musical Works Fund for distribution to interested copyright parties described in section 1001(7)(B).

(B)(i) Music publishers shall be entitled to 50 percent of the royalty payments allocated to the Musical Works Fund.

(ii) Writers shall be entitled to the other 50 percent of the royalty payments allocated to the Musical Works Fund.

(c) Allocation of Royalty Payments Within Groups.—If all interested copyright parties within a group specified in subsection (b) do not agree on a voluntary proposal for the distribution of the royalty payments within each group, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall, pursuant to the procedures specified under section 1007(c), allocate royalty payments under this section based on the extent to which, during the relevant period—

(1) for the Sound Recordings Fund, each sound recording was distributed in the form of digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings; and

(2) for the Musical Works Fund, each musical work was distributed in the form of digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings or disseminated to the public in transmissions.

 

 

1007. Procedures for distributing royalty payments5

(a) Filing of Claims and Negotiations.—

(1) Filing of claims.—During the first 2 months of each calendar year, every interested copyright party seeking to receive royalty payments to which such party is entitled under section 1006 shall file with the Copyright Royalty Judges a claim for payments collected during the preceding year in such form and manner as the Copyright Royalty Judges shall prescribe by regulation.

(2) Negotiations.—Notwithstanding any provision of the antitrust laws, for purposes of this section interested copyright parties within each group specified in section 1006(b) may agree among themselves to the proportionate division of royalty payments, may lump their claims together and file them jointly or as a single claim, or may designate a common agent, including any organization described in section 1001(D), to negotiate or receive payment on their behalf; except that no agreement under this subsection may modify the allocation of royalties specified in section 1006(b).

(b) Distribution of Payments in the Absence of a Dispute.—After the period established for the filing of claims under subsection (a), in each year, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall determine whether there exists a controversy concerning the distribution of royalty payments under section 1006(c). If the Copyright Royalty Judges determine that no such controversy exists, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall, within 30 days after such determination, authorize the distribution of the royalty payments as set forth in the agreements regarding the distribution of royalty payments entered into pursuant to subsection (a). The Librarian of Congress shall, before such royalty payments are distributed, deduct the reasonable administrative costs incurred under this section.

(c) Resolution of Disputes.—If the Copyright Royalty Judges find the existence of a controversy, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall, pursuant to chapter 8 of this title, conduct a proceeding to determine the distribution of royalty payments. During the pendency of such a proceeding, the Copyright Royalty Judges shall withhold from distribution an amount sufficient to satisfy all claims with respect to which a controversy exists, but shall, to the extent feasible, authorize the distribution of any amounts that are not in controversy. The Librarian of Congress shall, before such royalty payments are distributed, deduct the reasonable administrative costs incurred under this section.

 

 

Subchapter D — Prohibition on Certain Infringement Actions, Remedies, and Arbitration

1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions

No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.

 

 

1009. Civil remedies

(a) Civil Actions.—Any interested copyright party injured by a violation of section 1002 or 1003 may bring a civil action in an appropriate United States district court against any person for such violation.

(b) Other Civil Actions.—Any person injured by a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action in an appropriate United States district court for actual damages incurred as a result of such violation.

(c) Powers of the Court.—In an action brought under subsection (a), the court—

(1) may grant temporary and permanent injunctions on such terms as it deems reasonable to prevent or restrain such violation;

(2) in the case of a violation of section 1002, or in the case of an injury resulting from a failure to make royalty payments required by section 1003, shall award damages under subsection (d);

(3) in its discretion may allow the recovery of costs by or against any party other than the United States or an officer thereof; and

(4) in its discretion may award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party.

(d) Award of Damages.—

(1) Damages for section 1002 or 1003 violations.—

(A) Actual damages.—

(i) In an action brought under subsection (a), if the court finds that a violation of section 1002 or 1003 has occurred, the court shall award to the complaining party its actual damages if the complaining party elects such damages at any time before final judgment is entered.

(ii) In the case of section 1003, actual damages shall constitute the royalty payments that should have been paid under section 1004 and deposited under section 1005. In such a case, the court, in its discretion, may award an additional amount of not to exceed 50 percent of the actual damages.

(B) Statutory damages for section 1002 violations.—

(i) Device.—A complaining party may recover an award of statutory damages for each violation of section 1002(a) or (c) in the sum of not more than $2,500 per device involved in such violation or per device on which a service prohibited by section 1002(c) has been performed, as the court considers just.

(ii) Digital musical recording.—A complaining party may recover an award of statutory damages for each violation of section 1002(d) in the sum of not more than $25 per digital musical recording involved in such violation, as the court considers just.

(iii) Transmission.—A complaining party may recover an award of damages for each transmission or communication that violates section 1002(e) in the sum of not more than $10,000, as the court considers just.

(2) Repeated violations.—In any case in which the court finds that a person has violated section 1002 or 1003 within 3 years after a final judgment against that person for another such violation was entered, the court may increase the award of damages to not more than double the amounts that would otherwise be awarded under paragraph (1), as the court considers just.

(3) Innocent violations of section 1002.—The court in its discretion may reduce the total award of damages against a person violating section 1002 to a sum of not less than $250 in any case in which the court finds that the violator was not aware and had no reason to believe that its acts constituted a violation of section 1002.

(e) Payment of Damages.—Any award of damages under subsection (d) shall be deposited with the Register pursuant to section 1005 for distribution to interested copyright parties as though such funds were royalty payments made pursuant to section 1003.

(f) Impounding of Articles.—At any time while an action under subsection (a) is pending, the court may order the impounding, on such terms as it deems reasonable, of any digital audio recording device, digital musical recording, or device specified in section 1002(c) that is in the custody or control of the alleged violator and that the court has reasonable cause to believe does not comply with, or was involved in a violation of, section 1002.

(g) Remedial Modification and Destruction of Articles.—In an action brought under subsection (a), the court may, as part of a final judgment or decree finding a violation of section 1002, order the remedial modification or the destruction of any digital audio recording device, digital musical recording, or device specified in section 1002(c) that—

(1) does not comply with, or was involved in a violation of, section 1002, and

(2) is in the custody or control of the violator or has been impounded under subsection (f).

 

 

1010. Determination of certain disputes6

(a) Scope of Determination.—Before the date of first distribution in the United States of a digital audio recording device or a digital audio interface device, any party manufacturing, importing, or distributing such device, and any interested copyright party may mutually agree to petition the Copyright Royalty Judges to determine whether such device is subject to section 1002, or the basis on which royalty payments for such device are to be made under section 1003.

(b) Initiation of Proceedings.—The parties under subsection (a) shall file the petition with the Copyright Royalty Judges requesting the commencement of a proceeding. Within 2 weeks after receiving such a petition, the Chief Copyright Royalty Judge shall cause notice to be published in the Federal Register of the initiation of the proceeding.

(c) Stay of Judicial Proceedings.—Any civil action brought under section 1009 against a party to a proceeding under this section shall, on application of one of the parties to the proceeding, be stayed until completion of the proceeding.

(d) Proceeding.—The Copyright Royalty Judges shall conduct a proceeding with respect to the matter concerned, in accordance with such procedures as the Copyright Royalty Judges may adopt. The Copyright Royalty Judges shall act on the basis of a fully documented written record. Any party to the proceeding may submit relevant information and proposals to the Copyright Royalty Judges. The parties to the proceeding shall each bear their respective costs of participation.

(e) Judicial Review.—Any determination of the Copyright Royalty Judges under subsection (d) may be appealed, by a party to the proceeding, in accordance with section 803(d) of this title. The pendency of an appeal under this subsection shall not stay the determination of the Copyright Royalty Judges. If the court modifies the determination of the Copyright Royalty Judges, the court shall have jurisdiction to enter its own decision in accordance with its final judgment. The court may further vacate the determination of the Copyright Royalty Judges and remand the case for proceedings as provided in this section.

 

 

Music Video and Recording:

1101. Unauthorized fixation and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos

(a) Unauthorized Acts.—Anyone who, without the consent of the performer or performers involved—

(1) fixes the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance in a copy or phonorecord, or reproduces copies or phonorecords of such a performance from an unauthorized fixation,

(2) transmits or otherwise communicates to the public the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance, or

(3) distributes or offers to distribute, sells or offers to sell, rents or offers to rent, or traffics in any copy or phonorecord fixed as described in paragraph (1), regardless of whether the fixations occurred in the United States,

shall be subject to the remedies provided in sections 502 through 505, to the same extent as an infringer of copyright.

(b) Definition.—In this section, the term “traffic” has the same meaning as in section 2320(e) of title 18.2

(c) Applicability.—This section shall apply to any act or acts that occur on or after the date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

(d) State Law Not Preempted.—Nothing in this section may be construed to annul or limit any rights or remedies under the common law or statutes of any State.

LGTB+ Laws:

We believe that people use their voice and connect more freely when they don't feel attacked on the basis of who they are. That is why we don't allow hateful conduct on Facebook, Instagram or Threads.
We define hateful conduct as direct attacks against people – rather than concepts or institutions – on the basis of what we call protected characteristics (PCs): race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease. Additionally, we consider age a protected characteristic when referenced along with another protected characteristic. We also protect refugees, migrants, immigrants and asylum seekers from the most severe attacks (Tier 1 below), though we do allow commentary on and criticism of immigration policies. Similarly, we provide some protections for non-protected characteristics, such as occupation, when they are referenced along with a protected characteristic. Sometimes, based on local nuance, we consider certain words or phrases as frequently used proxies for protected characteristics.
We remove dehumanising speech, allegations of serious immorality or criminality, and slurs. We also remove harmful stereotypes, which we define as dehumanising comparisons that have historically been used to attack, intimidate or exclude specific groups, and that are often linked with offline violence. Finally, we remove serious insults, expressions of contempt or disgust, swearing and calls for exclusion or segregation when targeting people based on protected characteristics. We separate this speech into two tiers of severity, described below.
We recognise that people sometimes share content that includes slurs or someone else's speech in order to condemn the speech or report on it. In other cases, speech, including slurs, that might otherwise violate our standards is used self-referentially or in an empowering way. We allow this type of speech where the speaker's intention is clear. Where intention is unclear, we may remove content.
People sometimes use sex- or gender-exclusive language when discussing access to spaces often limited by sex or gender, such as access to bathrooms, specific schools, specific military, law enforcement or teaching roles, and health or support groups. Other times, they call for exclusion or use insulting language in the context of discussing political or religious topics, such as when discussing transgender rights, immigration or homosexuality. Finally, sometimes people curse at a gender in the context of a romantic break-up. Our policies are designed to allow room for these types of speech.
 
Do not post:
Tier 1
Content targeting a person or group of people (except groups described as having carried out violent or sexual crimes or representing less than half of a group) on the basis of their aforementioned protected characteristic(s) or immigration status in written or visual form with:
  • Dehumanising speech in the form of comparisons to or generalisations about animals, pathogens or other sub-human life forms, including:
  • Insects (including, but not limited to, cockroaches, locusts)
  • Animals in general or specific types of animals that are culturally perceived as inferior (including, but not limited to, Black people and apes or ape-like creatures; Jewish people and rats; Muslim people and pigs; Mexican people and worms)
  • Bacteria, viruses or microbes
  • Subhumanity (including, but not limited to: savages, devils, monsters)
  • Allegations of serious immorality and criminality:
  • Sexual predators and paedophiles (including, but not limited to: Muslim people having sex with goats or pigs)
  • Violent criminals (including but not limited to: terrorists, murderers)
  • Calls and hopes for the following harms (serious or specific threats and calls for violence are addressed under our Violence and Incitement policy):
  • Contracting a disease
  • Experiencing a natural disaster
  • Self-injury or suicide
  • Death without a perpetrator or method
  • Accidents and other physical harms caused either by no perpetrator or by a deity
  • Harmful stereotypes historically linked to intimidation or violence, such as Blackface; Holocaust denial; claims that Jewish people control financial, political or media institutions; references to Dalits as menial laborers; and comparing Black people to farm equipment.
  • Mocking the concept, events or victims of hate crimes even if no real person is depicted in an image.
  • Mocking people for having or experiencing a disease.
  • Content that describes or negatively targets people with slurs. Slurs are defined as words that inherently create an atmosphere of exclusion and intimidation against people on the basis of a protected characteristic, often because these words are tied to historical discrimination, oppression and violence.
Tier 2
Content targeting a person or group of people on the basis of their protected characteristic(s) (in written or visual form) with:
  • Calls or support for exclusion or segregation or statements of intent to exclude or segregate, defined as:
  • General exclusion, which means calling for general exclusion or segregation, such as "No X allowed!"
  • Political exclusion, which means denying the right to political participation or arguing for incarceration or denial of political rights.
  • Economic exclusion, which means denying access to economic entitlements and limiting participation in the labour market. We do allow content arguing for gender-based limitations of military, law enforcement and teaching jobs. We also allow the same content based on sexual orientation, when the content is based on religious beliefs.
  • Social exclusion, which means things like denying access to spaces (physical and online) and social services, except for sex or gender-based exclusion from spaces commonly limited by sex or gender, such as bathrooms, sports and sports leagues, health and support groups, and specific schools.
  • Insults, including those about:
  • Character, including but not limited to allegations of cowardice, dishonesty, basic criminality and sexual promiscuity or other sexual immorality.
  • Mental characteristics, including, but not limited to, allegations of stupidity, intellectual capacity and mental illness, and unsupported comparisons between PC groups on the basis of inherent intellectual capacity. We do allow allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation, given political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality and common non-serious usage of words such as "weird".
  • Other areas, including, but not limited to, allegations of worthlessness, uselessness, ugliness, dirtiness.
  • Expressions that suggest the target causes sickness, including, but not limited to, "make me vomit".
  • Targeted cursing, except certain gender-based cursing in a romantic break-up context, defined as:
  • Targeted use of "fuck" or variations of "fuck" with intent to insult, such as "Fuck the [Protected Characteristic]!"
  • Terms or phrases calling for engagement in sexual activity, or contact with genitalia, anus, faeces or urine, including, but not limited to, suck my dick, kiss my ass, eat shit.
 
For the following Community Standards, we require additional information and/or context to enforce:
Do not post:
  • Content explicitly providing or offering to provide products or services that aim to change people's sexual orientation or gender identity.
  • Content attacking concepts, institutions, ideas, practices or beliefs associated with protected characteristics, which are likely to contribute to imminent physical harm, intimidation or discrimination against the people associated with that protected characteristic. Meta looks at a range of signs to determine whether there is a threat of harm in the content. These include, but are not limited to, content that could incite imminent violence or intimidation; whether there is a period of heightened tension such as an election or ongoing conflict; and whether there is a recent history of violence against the targeted protected group. In some cases, we may also consider whether the speaker is a public figure or occupies a position of authority.
In certain cases, we will allow content that may otherwise violate the Community Standards when it is determined that the content is satirical. Content will only be allowed if the violating elements of the content are being satirised or attributed to something or someone else in order to mock or criticise them.
Note: If you are a European Union user and are seeing content that you believe violates hate speech laws within your country, you can submit a legal removal request to SlyxOne

 

Related Resources

Broadband Legislation Database

NCSL’s Broadband Database tracks legislation regarding broadband policy across state legislatures including topics of broadband funding, infrastructure, accessibility, mapping, governance, net neutrality, and other related topics. It reviews enacted and pending legislation beginning in 2023 and is updated monthly as legislation is identified by NCSL staff.
Database