United StatesCommunications Decency Act of 1996, indecent transmission and patently offensive display provisions
47 U.S.C. 223(a)(1)(B)(ii) and 223(d)
An adult content age verification (AV) rule binding public and private bodies.
As of .
What it requires
- The Supreme Court held the indecent transmission provision of section 223(a)(1)(B) and the patently offensive display provision of section 223(d) unconstitutional in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, decided ; the lines below state what those provisions prohibited.
- Section 223(a)(1)(B) barred anyone, by means of a telecommunications device and knowing that the recipient is under 18 years of age, from knowingly making, creating or soliciting, and initiating the transmission of, a communication that is obscene or indecent.
- Section 223(d) barred anyone from knowingly using an interactive computer service to send to a specific person under 18 years of age, or to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age, a communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs.
- It was a defense to a prosecution under section 223(a)(1)(B) or 223(d) that the person had taken, in good faith, reasonable, effective, and appropriate actions to restrict or prevent access by minors, or had restricted access by requiring use of a verified credit card, debit account, adult access code, or adult personal identification number.
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureYes
Criminal exposure note
Section 223(a) and section 223(d) each punished a violation by a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.
What it reaches
Age threshold
18
Covered services
Telecommunications devices and interactive computer services used to send or display a communication to a person under 18 years of age.
Obligation class
Prohibition
Verification methods
Transactional data
What this law does
Section 502 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 rewrote subsection (a) of section 223 of the Communications Act of 1934 and added subsection (d). Section 223(a)(1)(B) made it an offense, by means of a telecommunications device and knowing that the recipient is under 18 years of age, knowingly to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of, a communication that is obscene or indecent.
Section 223(d) made it an offense knowingly to use an interactive computer service to send to a specific person under 18 years of age, or to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age, a communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs.
Section 223(e)(5) made it a defense that the person had taken, in good faith, reasonable, effective, and appropriate actions to restrict or prevent access by minors, or had restricted access by requiring use of a verified credit card, debit account, adult access code, or adult personal identification number. A violation of section 223(a) or 223(d) was punishable by a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.
In Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, decided , the Supreme Court held that the indecent transmission and patently offensive display provisions abridge the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. The Court severed the words "or indecent" from section 223(a), leaving the rest of section 223(a) standing, and held that section 223(d) could not be saved by such a textual surgery.
Section 603 of Public Law 108-21 later substituted "child pornography" for "indecent" in section 223(a)(1)(B) and "is obscene or child pornography" for the patently offensive language of section 223(d)(1).
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app publishes adult content, operates a social platform or serves under-18s.