On May 19, 2026, the notice and removal requirements set forth in Section 3 of the Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks Act (“TAKE IT DOWN Act” or “TIDA”) entered into effect.  Under this section, covered platforms must establish a process for individuals to notify the platform of certain intimate visual depictions that were shared without their consent and to request their removal.  Covered platforms that receive valid requests must remove the visual depictions and identical copies within 48 hours.  The FTC, which enforces the TIDA, intends to do so “vigorously.”  The FTC has launched a website where individuals can submit complaints about platforms that fail to comply with these requirements and has sent warning letters advising companies of their obligations under the law.

TIDA’s application to “covered platforms.”  As described in our previous blog post, TIDA’s notice and removal requirements appear to apply broadly to a “covered platform,” which is defined as a website, online service, online applications, or mobile app that serves the public and either:

  1. “[P]rimarily provides” a forum for user-generated content, such as messages, videos, images, games, and audio files; or
  2. Makes available content of nonconsensual intimate visual depictions in the regular course of its trade or business. 

This definition excludes certain providers, including email and broadband internet access providers, as well as online services, applications, or websites that consist primarily of content that is not user-generated and instead is preselected by the provider, and for which any chat, comment, or interactive functionality is incidental to, directly related to, or dependent on the provision of preselected content.  Recent FTC guidance (discussed further below) states that this definition covers “various websites, apps, and online services, such as social media, messaging, image or video sharing, and gaming platforms.”

Section 3 notice and removal requirements.  Under TIDA Section 3, covered platforms must put in place a process for “identifiable” individuals, including minors, to notify the platform of certain intimate visual depictions and submit a request for removal.  Specifically, individuals (or an authorized person acting on their behalf) may seek the removal of intimate visual depictions that depict the individual and that were published without their consent.  Following receipt of a valid removal request, the platform must remove the depiction and make “reasonable efforts” to remove “known identical copies” of the depiction within 48 hours. 

Enforcement.  The FTC issued recent guidance on TIDA and sent letters to technology companies and websites reminding them of their obligations to comply with TIDA.  The FTC has also launched TakeItDown.ftc.gov, through which individuals can submit complaints about platforms that have failed to respond to valid requests to remove intimate photos or videos that were posted without their consent.  Separately, the Department of Justice has already secured a conviction and recently announced two arrests in criminal cases brought under TIDA’s separate criminal provisions, potentially signaling the Administration’s focus on TIDA enforcement generally. 

The FTC guidance on TIDA lists steps that covered platforms should take to comply with TIDA, including:

  • Providing “clear and conspicuous notice” to individuals about how to submit a removal request.
  • Establishing a process that “make[s] it easy for people to submit a removal request.”  For example, the FTC guidance states that, the platform could enable individuals to “submit a removal request directly from the photo or video.”  The guidance further notes that “TIDA’s protections are not limited to individuals who hold an account on your platform.”
  • The guidance further provides that “[p]latforms should make it easy for people to track the status of their removal requests” including by “provid[ing] an identifying number for each take down request your platform receives.” 
  • Additionally, platforms should “design [their] TIDA process to let people know you removed the reported content, or if not, why.”

The guidance also states that “[p]latforms must find and remove duplicate photos or videos.” In addition to these steps, the FTC guidance also advises covered platforms to consider using technology, such as hashing, to prevent the re-appearance of intimate content that has been removed from the platform.  The FTC recommends sharing these hashes with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and StopNCII.org, as appropriate.

Violations of Section 3.  Failure to comply with Section 3 of TIDA constitutes a violation of an FTC trade regulation rule, which subjects violators to the risk of civil penalties.  TIDA provides a safe harbor for a covered platform that, in good faith, disables access to or removes alleged nonconsensual intimate visual depictions based on facts or circumstances that indicate that the depiction was published in violation of TIDA.

Photo of Andrew Siegel Andrew Siegel

Andrew Siegel defends clients in FTC, DOJ, and State AG consumer protection investigations and enforcement actions, including against allegations relating to advertising and marketing practices, subscription autorenewals, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.

Andrew has extensive experience representing clients across industries, including in…

Andrew Siegel defends clients in FTC, DOJ, and State AG consumer protection investigations and enforcement actions, including against allegations relating to advertising and marketing practices, subscription autorenewals, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.

Andrew has extensive experience representing clients across industries, including in the technology, consumer products, and financial services sectors, in high-stakes government investigations by federal and state regulators. He defends clients against allegations relating to the marketing of online subscriptions, the use of algorithms and artificial intelligence, undisclosed endorsements, claim substantiation, and other unfair and deceptive practices. He also counsels clients on proactive compliance with FTC and state regulations governing consumer interactions.

In addition, Andrew advises clients on the protection of customer information and other sensitive data as they respond to demands from U.S. and international law enforcement agencies and government regulators, as well as private plaintiffs. Andrew assists clients in navigating U.S. and international data privacy requirements as they respond to federal grand jury subpoenas, international legal demands, and discovery requests.

Photo of Nicholas Xenakis Nicholas Xenakis

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill and legal experience to provide public policy and crisis management counsel to clients in a range of industries.

Nick assists clients in developing and implementing policy solutions to litigation and regulatory matters, including on issues involving…

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill and legal experience to provide public policy and crisis management counsel to clients in a range of industries.

Nick assists clients in developing and implementing policy solutions to litigation and regulatory matters, including on issues involving antitrust, artificial intelligence, bankruptcy, criminal justice, financial services, immigration, intellectual property, life sciences, national security, and technology. He also represents companies and individuals in investigations before U.S. Senate and House Committees.

Nick previously served as General Counsel for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, where he managed committee staff and directed legislative efforts. He also participated in key judicial and Cabinet confirmations, including of Attorneys General and Supreme Court Justices. Before his time on Capitol Hill, Nick served as an attorney with the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Photo of Diana Lee Diana Lee

Diana Lee is an associate in the technology regulatory group. She counsels clients on a range of regulatory and litigation matters involving electronic surveillance, government demands for data, national security, and data privacy and cybersecurity issues, with a particular focus on cross-border and…

Diana Lee is an associate in the technology regulatory group. She counsels clients on a range of regulatory and litigation matters involving electronic surveillance, government demands for data, national security, and data privacy and cybersecurity issues, with a particular focus on cross-border and multi-jurisdictional concerns.

Before rejoining the firm, Diana clerked for the Honorable Victor A. Bolden on the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.

Diana is a member of the Bars of New York and the District of Columbia.

Photo of Ali Cooper-Ponte Ali Cooper-Ponte

Ali Cooper-Ponte draws on her experience at the U.S. Department of Justice to advise clients on complex and sensitive national security, cybersecurity, and online safety matters across regulatory, investigations, enforcement, and litigation contexts.

In her investigations and litigation practice, Ali guides clients through…

Ali Cooper-Ponte draws on her experience at the U.S. Department of Justice to advise clients on complex and sensitive national security, cybersecurity, and online safety matters across regulatory, investigations, enforcement, and litigation contexts.

In her investigations and litigation practice, Ali guides clients through both internal and government investigations. She helps clients across industries navigate significant enterprise risks, including insider, criminal, and advanced persistent or nation-state threats, as well as challenges relating to emerging technologies. She has also helped clients proactively engage with or respond to inquiries by the U.S. Department of Justice, state Attorneys General, and the Federal Trade Commission.

In her advisory practice, Ali helps clients strategically manage rapidly-changing regulatory and technological landscapes. She counsels clients on compliance with national security, cybersecurity, data privacy, content moderation, and child exploitation laws. She has particular expertise on issues relating to government access to data, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment. She also has significant experience with new Federal and state laws implicating Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment. Here, her experience spans industries (including the technology, healthcare, cryptocurrency and financial services, and aerospace and defense industries) and includes providing practical advice on new legislation, regulatory frameworks, and court rulings as well as developing legislative proposals and potential challenges to new legislation and government action.

Previously, Ali served in the U.S. Department of Justice as Senior Counsel in the Office of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, where she focused on the cyber and child exploitation portfolios, and as a Trial Attorney in the National Security Division’s National Security Cyber Section and the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section. She joined the Justice Department as part of its inaugural class of Cyber Fellows, which gave her broad exposure to the Department’s work to address cyber and cyber-enabled threats.

Earlier in her career, Ali clerked for Judge José A. Cabranes on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Prior to law school, Ali worked as a legal investigations specialist focused on electronic surveillance and law enforcement access issues at a large technology company.

In addition to her regular practice, Ali leverages her experience to counsel pro bono clients engaged in work to protect children and civil liberties.

Photo of Krissy Chapman Krissy Chapman

Kristen “Krissy” Chapman is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She represents and advises clients on a range of cybersecurity, data privacy, and government contracts issues, including cyber and data security incident response and preparedness, cross-border privacy law, government and internal…

Kristen “Krissy” Chapman is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She represents and advises clients on a range of cybersecurity, data privacy, and government contracts issues, including cyber and data security incident response and preparedness, cross-border privacy law, government and internal investigations, and regulatory compliance.

Prior to joining the firm, Krissy served as a consultant in both the private and public sectors, advising clients across a range of industries, including transportation and infrastructure, life sciences and healthcare, and national security.