Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Csam And Internet Liability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana proposal would let victims and private plaintiffs sue websites that profit from child sexual abuse material
Summary
Representative Lucas Schubert told the Senate Judiciary Committee HB 752 would create statutory damages and a private right of action against websites that distribute or profit from child sexual abuse material; business groups and tech trade groups warned the measure's thresholds and 48-hour takedown defense could create impractical liability and exposure for legitimate platforms.
Representative Lucas Schubert introduced House Bill 752 to the Senate Judiciary Committee, describing it as a statute to hold content providers and websites liable for distributing child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and for profiting from that distribution. Schubert said the bill’s liability schedule would impose substantial statutory damages — $5 million for intentional violations, $1 million for negligent violations and $100,000 for strict liability in some configurations — and would provide a 48-hour takedown defense if a site removes material within that timeframe.
Schubert emphasized that the bill targets content providers that produce, publish or profit from CSAM and that it is intended to reach websites that monetize such content. The sponsor said the amendment under preparation would raise the "substantial amount" threshold (initially set at 5% of visual content) to around 30% so it would not sweep in mainstream retailers and streaming services.
Opponents — including Charles Robinson for the Montana Chamber of Commerce and Brad Griffin for the Montana Retail Association — warned the 5% threshold in the printed draft would capture many legitimate retailers and could allow abusive lawsuits by bad actors. They argued existing federal law imposes criminal penalties and mandatory reporting obligations and said the 48-hour notice-and-takedown defense modeled on federal concepts may be impractical for hidden or embedded content.
TechNet's Rose Feliciano urged the bill require a knowledge standard consistent with federal law and asked that hosting-only services not be treated as distributors. Chamber and retail witnesses suggested a higher threshold (33 1/3%) has been used in other state laws and recommended further coordination. The sponsor said he had removed AG enforcement from the bill at the House stage and that the proposal creates a private right of action instead of using state resources for enforcement; he also discussed an amendment to address thresholds and defenses.
The committee questioned how private plaintiffs would pursue claims, who would administer any award, and fiscal impacts; the sponsor said the Department of Revenue would administer certain accounts in the amendment and that private plaintiffs or victims would receive statutory damage portions. Members discussed the realism of a 48-hour takedown defense when content is hidden and whether multi-state precedents exist. The hearing closed with the sponsor saying he would work with opponents on amendments.
