Technology Transparency — An act relating to technology transparency; providing definitions
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- 2021 3098 Commerce Committee General Publications Fn Technology Transparency Workshop Draf
Summary
A 21-page workshop draft of a Florida House of Representatives bill relating to technology transparency. Its title states that it creates s. 106.072, F.S., s. 287.137, F.S., and s. 501.2041, F.S., and amends s. 501.212, F.S. Section 1 provides that a social media platform may not knowingly deplatform a candidate, with fines of $100,000 per day for statewide candidates and $10,000 per day for other candidates. Section 2 defines an antitrust violator vendor list, bars listed persons or affiliates from bidding on new contracts with public entities, and directs the department to publish the initial list on January 1, 2022. The draft closes with Section 4 amending s. 501.212, a severability clause in Section 5, and an effective date of July 1, 2021 in Section 6.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Technology Transparency — An act relating to technology transparency; providing definitions.”
Original at www.flhouse.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2021-3098-commerce-committee-general-publications-fn-technology-transparency-workshop-draft/
, SHA-256 6b6bcd44f1dae3b8322b866eacae7caa05d13de76c269b685abc88eaffeaecd5.Full text
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
A bill to be entitled
An act relating to technology transparency; creating
s. 106.072, F.S.; providing definitions; prohibiting a
social media platform from knowingly deplatforming a
candidate; providing fines for violations; authorizing
social media platforms to provide fee advertising for
candidates under specified conditions; providing
enforcement mechanism; creating s. 287.137, F.S.;
providing definitions; providing requirements for
public contracts and economic incentives related to
entities who have been convicted or held civilly
liable for antitrust violations; prohibiting a public
entity from entering into any type contract with a
person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor
list; providing applicability; requiring certain
contract documents to contain a specified statement;
requiring the Department of Management Services to
maintain a list of people or affiliates disqualified
from the public contracting and purchasing process;
specifying requirements for publishing such list;
providing procedures for placing a person or affiliate
on the list; providing procedural and legal rights for
a person or affiliate to challenge placement on the
list; providing a procedure for placing a person
temporarily on an antitrust violator vendor list;
Page 1 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
providing procedural and legal rights for a person to
challenge temporary placement on the list; authorizing
a person, under specified conditions, to retain rights
or obligations under existing contracts or binding
agreements; prohibiting a person who has been placed
on antitrust violator vendor list from receiving
certain economic incentives; providing exceptions;
providing enforcement methodology; creating s.
501.2041, F.S.; providing definitions; authorizing the
Department of Legal Affairs to bring specified actions
against social media platforms for failure to comply
with specified requirements; specifying requirements
that must be contained when notification is given by a
social platform for certain purposes; providing an
exception to notification requirements; authorizing
the department to investigate suspected violations
under the Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act;
specifying circumstances under which a private cause
of action may be brought; specifying how damages are
to be calculated; specifying powers of the Department
of Legal Affairs related to investigations related to
acts of shadow banning by social media platforms;
providing construction for violations of certain
provisions of this act; granting the department
specified subpoena powers; providing enforcement
Page 2 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
authority; amending s. 501.212, F.S.; conforming a
provision to changes made by the act; providing a
severability clause; providing an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1. Section 106.072, Florida Statutes, is created
to read:
106.072 Social media deplatforming of political
candidates.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Candidate" has the same meaning as in s.
106.011(3)(e).
(b) "Deplatform" has the same meaning as in s. 501.172.
(c) "Social media platform" has the same meaning as in s.
501.172.
(2) A social media platform may not knowingly deplatform a
candidate. Upon a finding of a violation of this section by the
Elections Commission, the social media platform may be fined
$100,000 per day for statewide candidates and $10,000 per day
for other candidates.
(3) A social media platform that knowingly provides free
advertising for a candidate must report such advertising as an
in-kind contribution to the candidate under state election laws.
Posts, content, material, and comments by candidates that are
Page 3 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
shown on the platform in the same or similar way as other user's
posts, content, material, and comments is not considered free
advertising.
(4) This section may only be enforced to the extent not
inconsistent with federal law and 47 U.S.C. s. 230(e)(3), and
notwithstanding any other provision of state law.
Section 2. Section 287.137, Florida Statutes, is created
to read:
287.137 Antitrust violations; denial or revocation of the
right to transact business with public entities; denial of
economic benefits.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Affiliate" means:
1. A predecessor or successor of a person convicted of or
held civilly liable for an antitrust violation; or
2. An entity under the control of any natural person who
is active in the management of the entity and who has been
convicted of or held civilly liable for an antitrust violation.
The term includes those officers, directors, executives,
partners, shareholders, employees, members, and agents who are
active in the management of an affiliate. The ownership by one
person of shares constituting a controlling interest in another
person, or a pooling of equipment or income among persons when
not for fair market value under an arm's length agreement, is a
prima facie case that one person controls another person. The
Page 4 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
term also includes a person who knowingly enters into a joint
venture with a person who has violated an antitrust law during
the preceding 36 months.
(b) "Antitrust violation" means any state or federal
antitrust law as determined in a civil or criminal proceeding
brought by the Attorney General, a state attorney, a similar
body or agency of another state, or the United States Department
of Justice.
(c) "Antitrust violator vendor list" means the list
required to be kept by the department pursuant to paragraph
(3)(b).
(d) "Conviction or being held civilly liable" or
"convicted or held civilly liable" means a criminal finding of
guilt or conviction, with or without an adjudication of guilt,
being held civilly liable, or having a judgment levied for an
antitrust violation, in any federal or state trial court of
record relating to charges brought by indictment, information,
or complaint on or after July 1, 2021, as a result of a jury
verdict, nonjury trial, or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo
contendere or other order finding of liability.
(e) "Economic incentives" means state grants, cash grants,
tax exemptions, tax refunds, tax credits, state funds, and other
state incentives under chapter 288 or administered by Enterprise
Florida, Inc.
(f) "Person" means a natural person or an entity organized
Page 5 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
under the laws of any state or of the United States who operates
as a social media platform, as defined in s. 501.2041, with the
legal power to enter into a binding contract and which bids or
applies to bid on contracts let by a public entity, or which
otherwise transacts or applies to transact business with a
public entity. The term "person" includes those officers,
directors, executives, partners, shareholders, employees,
members, and agents who are active in management of an entity.
(g) "Public entity" means the state and any of its
departments or agencies.
(2)(a) A person or affiliate who has been placed on the
antitrust violator vendor list following a conviction or being
held civilly liable for an antitrust violation may not submit a
bid, proposal, or reply for any new contract to provide any
goods or services to a public entity; may not submit a bid,
proposal, or reply for a new contract with a public entity for
the construction or repair of a public building or public work;
may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply on new leases of real
property to a public entity; may not be awarded or perform work
as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a
new contract with a public entity; and may not transact new
business with a public entity.
(b) A public entity may not accept a bid, proposal, or
reply from, award a new contract to, or transact new business
with any person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor
Page 6 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
list unless that person or affiliate has been removed from the
list pursuant to paragraph (3)(e).
(c) This subsection does not apply to contracts that were
awarded or business transactions that began before a person or
an affiliate was placed on the antitrust violator vendor list,
and in no event before July 1, 2021.
(3)(a) Beginning July 1, 2021, all invitations to bid,
requests for proposals, and invitations to negotiate, as defined
in s. 287.012, and any contract document described in s. 287.058
shall contain a statement informing persons of the provisions of
paragraph (2)(a).
(b) The department shall maintain an antitrust violator
vendor list of the names and addresses of the people or
affiliates who have been disqualified from the public
contracting and purchasing process under this section. The
department shall publish the initial antitrust violator vendor
list on January 1, 2022, and shall publish an updated version of
the list quarterly thereafter. The revised quarterly list shall
also be electronically posted. Notwithstanding this paragraph, a
person or affiliate disqualified from the public contracting and
purchasing process pursuant to this section is disqualified as
of the date the final order is entered.
(c)1. Upon receiving reasonable information from any
source that a person was convicted or held civilly liable, the
department shall investigate the information and determine
Page 7 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
whether good cause exists to place that person or an affiliate
of that person on the antitrust violator vendor list. If good
cause exists, the department shall notify the person or
affiliate in writing of its intent to place the name of that
person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor list, and
of the person's or affiliate's right to a hearing, the procedure
that must be followed, and the applicable time requirements. If
the person or affiliate does not request a hearing, the
department shall enter a final order placing the name of the
person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor list. A
person or affiliate may not be placed on the antitrust violator
vendor list without receiving an individual notice of intent
from the department.
2. Within 21 days after receipt of the notice of intent,
the person or affiliate may file a petition for a formal hearing
under ss. 120.569 and 120.57(1) to determine whether it is in
the public interest for the person or affiliate to be placed on
the antitrust violator vendor list. A person or affiliate may
not file a petition for an informal hearing under s. 120.57(2).
The procedures of chapter 120 shall apply to any formal hearing
under this paragraph except within 30 days after the formal
hearing or receipt of the hearing transcript, whichever is
later, the administrative law judge shall enter a final order,
which shall consist of findings of fact, conclusions of law,
interpretation of agency rules, and any other information
Page 8 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
required by law or rule to be contained in the final order. The
final order shall direct the department to place or not place
the person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor list.
The final order of the administrative law judge is final agency
action for purposes of s. 120.68.
3. In determining whether it is in the public interest to
place a person or affiliate on the antitrust violator vendor
list under this paragraph, the administrative law judge shall
consider the following factors:
a. Whether the person or affiliate committed an antitrust
violation.
b. The nature and details of the antitrust violation.
c. The degree of culpability of the person or affiliate
proposed to be placed on the antitrust violator vendor list.
d. Reinstatement or clemency in any jurisdiction in
relation to the antitrust violation at issue in the proceeding.
e. The needs of public entities for additional competition
in the procurement of goods and services in their respective
markets.
4. In any proceeding under this paragraph, the department
must prove that it is in the public interest for the person or
affiliate to whom it has given notice under this paragraph to be
placed on the antitrust violator vendor list. Proof that a
person was convicted or was held civilly liable, or that an
entity is an affiliate of a person constitutes a prima facie
Page 9 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
case that it is in the public interest for the person or
affiliate to whom the department has given notice to be put on
the antitrust violator vendor list. Status as an affiliate must
be proven by clear and convincing evidence. If the
administrative law judge determines that the person was not
convicted or that the person was not civilly liable or is not an
affiliate of such person, that person or affiliate shall not be
placed on the antitrust violator vendor list.
5. Any person or affiliate who has been notified by the
department of its intent to place his or her name on the
antitrust violator vendor list may offer evidence on any
relevant issue. An affidavit alone does not constitute competent
substantial evidence that the person has not been convicted or
is not an affiliate of a person so convicted or held civilly
liable. Upon establishment of a prima facie case that it is in
the public interest for the person or affiliate to whom the
department has given notice to be put on the antitrust violator
vendor list, the person or affiliate may prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that it would not be in the public
interest to put him or her on the antitrust violator vendor
list, based upon evidence addressing the factors in subparagraph
3.
(d)1. If a person has been charged or accused of any state
or federal antitrust law in a civil or criminal proceeding
brought by the Attorney General, a state attorney, or the United
Page 10 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
States Department of Justice on or after July 1, 2021, the
Attorney General may, by a finding of probable cause that a
person has likely violated the underlying antitrust laws,
temporarily place such person on the antitrust violator vendor
list until such proceeding has concluded.
2. If probable cause exists, the Attorney General shall
notify the person in writing of its intent to temporarily place
the name of that person on the antitrust violator vendor list,
and of the person's right to a hearing, the procedure that must
be followed, and the applicable time requirements. If the person
does not request a hearing, the Attorney General shall enter a
final order temporarily placing the name of the person on the
antitrust violator vendor list. A person may not be placed on
the antitrust violator vendor list without receiving an
individual notice of intent from the Attorney General.
3. Within 21 days after receipt of the notice of intent,
the person may file a petition for a formal hearing pursuant to
ss. 120.569 and 120.57(1) to determine whether it is in the
public interest for the person or affiliate to be temporarily
placed on the antitrust violator vendor list. A person or
affiliate may not file a petition for an informal hearing under
s. 120.57(2). The procedures of chapter 120 shall apply to any
formal hearing under this paragraph.
4. In determining whether it is in the public interest to
place a person on the antitrust violator vendor list under this
Page 11 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
paragraph, the administrative law judge shall consider the
following factors:
a. The likelihood the person committed the antitrust
violation.
b. The nature and details of the antitrust violation.
c. The degree of culpability of the person proposed to be
placed on the antitrust violator vendor list.
d. The needs of public entities for additional competition
in the procurement of goods and services in their respective
markets.
5. This paragraph does not apply to affiliates.
(e)1. A person may be removed from the antitrust violator
vendor list subject to such terms and conditions as may be
prescribed by the administrative law judge upon a determination
that removal is in the public interest. In determining whether
removal would be in the public interest, the administrative law
judge must consider any relevant factors, including, but not
limited to, the factors identified in subparagraph (c)3. Upon
proof that a person was found not guilty or not civilly liable,
the antitrust violation case was dismissed, the court entered a
finding in the person's favor, the person's conviction or
determination of liability has been reversed on appeal, or that
the person has been pardoned, the administrative law judge shall
determine that removal of the person or an affiliate of that
person from the antitrust violator vendor list is in the public
Page 12 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
interest. A person on the antitrust violator vendor list may
petition for removal from the list no sooner than 6 months after
the date a final order is entered pursuant to this section but
may petition for removal at any time if the petition is based
upon a reversal of the conviction or liability on appellate
review or pardon. The petition must be filed with the
department, and the proceeding must be conducted pursuant to the
procedures and requirements of this subsection.
2. If the petition for removal is denied, the person or
affiliate may not petition for another hearing on removal for a
period of 9 months after the date of denial, unless the petition
is based upon a reversal of the conviction on appellate review
or a pardon. The department may petition for removal before the
expiration of such period if, in its discretion, it determines
that removal would be in the public interest.
(4) The conviction of a person or a person held civilly
liable for an antitrust violation, or placement on the antitrust
violator vendor list, does not affect any rights or obligations
under any contract, franchise, or other binding agreement which
predates such conviction or placement on the antitrust violator
vendor list.
(5) A person who has been placed on the antitrust violator
vendor list is not a qualified applicant for economic incentives
under chapter 288, and such entity and shall not be qualified to
receive such economic incentives.
Page 13 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(6) This section does not apply to any activities
regulated by the Public Service Commission or to the purchase of
goods or services made by any public entity from the Department
of Corrections, from the nonprofit corporation organized under
chapter 946, or from any accredited nonprofit workshop certified
under ss. 413.032-413.037.
(7) This section may only be enforced to the extent not
inconsistent with federal law and notwithstanding any other
provision of state law.
Section 3. Section 501.2041, Florida Statutes, is created
to read:
501.2041 Unlawful acts and practices by social media
platforms.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Algorithm" means a mathematical set of rules that
specify how a group of data behaves that will assist in ranking
search results and maintaining order or that is used in sorting
or ranking content or material based on relevancy or other
factors instead of using published time or chronological order
of such content or material.
(b) "Censor" includes any action taken by a social media
platform to delete, regulate, restrict, edit, alter, inhibit the
publication or republication of, suspend a right to post,
remove, or post an addendum to any content or material posted by
a user. This term also includes actions to inhibit the ability
Page 14 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
of a user to be viewable by or to interact with another user of
the social media platform.
(c) "Deplatform" means the action or practice by a social
media platform to permanently delete or ban a user or to
temporarily delete or ban a user from the social media platform
for more than 60 days.
(d) "Journalistic enterprise" means an entity that:
1. Publishes in excess of 100,000 words available online
with at least 50,000 paid subscribers or 100,000 monthly active
users;
2. Publishes 100 hours of audio or video available online
with at least 100 million viewers annually;
3. Operates a cable channel that provides more than 40
hours of content per week to more than 100,000 cable television
subscribers; or
4. Operates under a broadcast license issued by the
Federal Communications Commission.
(e) "Post-prioritization" means action by a social media
platform to place, feature, or prioritize certain content or
material ahead of, below, or in a more or less prominent
position than others in a newsfeed, feed, view, or search
results. The term does not include post-prioritization of
content and material based on payments by a third party,
including other users, to the social media platform.
(f) "Shadow ban" means action by a social media platform,
Page 15 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
through any means, whether the action is determined by a natural
person or an algorithm, to limit or eliminate the exposure of a
user or content or material posted by a user to other users of
the social media platform. This term includes acts of shadow
banning by a social media platform that are not readily apparent
to a user.
(g) "Social media platform" means any information service,
system, Internet search engine, or access software provider that
does business in the state, and provides or enables computer
access by multiple users to a computer server, including an
Internet platform and/or a social media site. The Internet
platform or social media site may be a sole proprietorship,
partnership, limited liability company, corporation,
association, or other legal entity that is organized or operated
for the profit or financial benefit of its shareholders or other
owners, that does business in the state, and that satisfies at
least one of the following thresholds:
1. Has annual gross revenues in excess of $100 million, as
adjusted in January of each odd-numbered year to reflect any
increase in the Consumer Price Index.
2. Has at least 100 million monthly users globally.
(h) "User" means a person who resides or is domiciled in
the state and who has an account on a social media platform,
regardless of whether the person posts or has posted content or
material to the social media platform.
Page 16 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(2) A social media platform that fails to comply with any
of the provisions of paragraphs (a)-(j) commits a violation of
this section.
(a) A social media platform must publish the standards,
including detailed definitions, it uses or has used for
determining how to censor, deplatform, and shadow ban.
(b) A social media platform must apply censorship,
deplatforming, and shadow banning standards in a consistent
manner among its users on the platform.
(c) A social media platform must inform each user about
any changes to its user rules, terms, and agreements before
implementing the changes and may not make changes more than once
every 30 days.
(d) A social media platform may not censor a user's
content or material or deplatform a user from the social media
platform:
1. Without notifying the user who posted or attempted to
post the content or material; or
2. In a way that violates this part.
(e) A social media platform must:
1. Provide a mechanism that allows a user to request the
number of other users who were provided or shown the user's
content or posts.
2. Provide, upon request, a user with the number of other
users who were provided or shown content or posts.
Page 17 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(f) A social media platform must:
1. Categorize algorithms used for post-prioritization and
shadow banning.
2. Allow a user to opt out of post-prioritization and
shadow banning algorithm categories to allow sequential or
chronological posts and content.
(g) A social media platform must provide users with an
annual notice on the use of algorithms for post-prioritization
and shadow banning and reoffer annually the opt out opportunity
in subparagraph (2)(f)2.
(h) A social media company may not apply or use post-
prioritization or shadow banning algorithms for content and
material posted by or about a user who is known by the social
media platform to be a candidate as defined in s. 106.011(3)(e),
beginning from the date of qualification and ending on the date
of the election or the date such candidate for office ceases to
be a candidate before the date of election. Post-prioritization
of certain content or material from or about a candidate for
office based on payments to the social media platform by such
candidate for office or a third party is not a violation of this
paragraph. Social media platforms must provide users with a
method to identify themselves as qualified candidates, and may
confirm such qualification by reviewing the website of the
Division of Elections of the Department of State.
(i) A social media platform must allow a user who has been
Page 18 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
deplatformed to access or retrieve all of the user's
information, content, material, and data for at least 60 days
after being deplatformed.
(j) A social media platform may not take any action to
censor, deplatform, or shadow ban a journalistic enterprise
based on the content of its publication or broadcast. Post-
prioritization of certain journalistic enterprise content based
on payments to the social media platform by such journalistic
enterprise is not a violation of this paragraph.
(3) For purposes of subparagraph (2)(d)1., a notification
must:
(a) Be in writing.
(b) Be delivered via electronic mail or direct electronic
notification to the user within 30 days of the censoring action.
(c) Include a thorough rationale explaining the reason
that the social media platform censored the user.
(d) Include a precise and thorough explanation of how the
social media platform became aware of the censored content or
material, including a thorough explanation of the algorithms
used, if any, to identify or flag the user's content or material
as objectionable.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section,
a social media platform is not required to notify a user if the
censored content or material is obscene as defined in s.
847.001.
Page 19 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(5) If the department, by its own inquiry or as a result
of a complaint, suspects that a violation of this section is
imminent, occurring, or has occurred, the department may
investigate the suspected violation in accordance with this
part.
(6) A user may only bring a private cause of action for
violations of paragraph (2)(b) or subparagraph (2)(d)1. In a
private cause of action brought under paragraph (2)(b) or
subparagraph (2)(d)1., the court may award the following damages
to the user:
(a) Up to $100,000 in statutory damages per proven claim.
(b) Actual damages.
(c) If aggravating factors are present, punitive damages.
(d) Other forms of equitable relief.
(e) If the user was deplatformed in violation of paragraph
(2)(b), costs and reasonable attorney fees.
(7) For purposes of bringing an action under subsection
(2) or subsection (6), each failure to comply with the
individual provisions of subsection (2) shall be treated as a
separate violation, act, or practice.
(8) In an investigation by the department into alleged
violations of this section, the department's investigative
powers include, but are not limited to, the ability to subpoena
any algorithm used by a social media platform related to any
alleged violation.
Page 20 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
V
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(9) This section may only be enforced to the extent not
inconsistent with federal law and 47 U.S.C. s. 230(e)(3), and
notwithstanding any other provision of state law.
Section 4. Subsection (2) of section 501.212, Florida
Statutes, is amended to read:
501.212 Application.—This part does not apply to:
(2) Except as provided in s. 501.2041, a publisher,
broadcaster, printer, or other person engaged in the
dissemination of information or the reproduction of printed or
pictorial matter, insofar as the information or matter has been
disseminated or reproduced on behalf of others without actual
knowledge that it violated this part.
Section 5. If any provision of this act or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of
the act which can be given effect without the invalid provision
or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are
declared severable.
Section 6. This act shall take effect July 1, 2021.
Page 21 of 21
Technology Transparency - Workshop Draft
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
VFile and source
- File
- 2021_3098_commerce-committee_general-publications_fn-technology-transparency-workshop-draft.pdf
- Size
- 236,223 bytes
- SHA-256
- 6b6bcd44f1dae3b8322b866eacae7caa05d13de76c269b685abc88eaffeaecd5
- Our copy
- 2021_3098_commerce-committee_general-publications_fn-technology-transparency-workshop-draft.pdf
- Original
- www.flhouse.gov