    [Senate Hearing 119-171]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-171

                        THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY:
                         AI	GENERATED DEEPFAKES IN 2025

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIVACY,
                            TECHNOLOGY, AND THE LAW

                                     OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 21, 2025

                                   __________

                               Serial No. J-119-20

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            www.judiciary.senate.gov
                                www.govinfo.gov

                                       _______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    61-677                    WASHINGTON : 2025

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                      CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa, Chairman
    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois,
    JOHN CORNYN, Texas                       Ranking Member
    MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah                 SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri                CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
    THOM TILLIS, North Carolina          RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana              MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
    ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               ALEX PADILLA, California
    KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama            PETER WELCH, Vermont
    ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ADAM B. SCHIFF, California

                 Kolan Davis, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
             Joe Zogby, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director

                Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law

                       MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee, Chair
    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota,
    JOHN CORNYN, Texas                       Ranking Member
    JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri                CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
    JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana              RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ALEX PADILLA, California
                                         ADAM B. SCHIFF, California

                     Ben Blackmon, Republican Chief Counsel
                     Dan Goldberg, Democratic Chief Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Blackburn, Hon. Marsha...........................................     1
    Klobuchar, Hon. Amy..............................................     2
    Tillis, Hon. Thom
        Prepared statement...........................................    26
    Coons, Hon. Christopher A........................................     4

                                   WITNESSES

    Brookman, Justin.................................................    10
        Prepared statement...........................................    27

    Carlos, Suzana...................................................    12
        Prepared statement...........................................    50

    Glazier, Mitch...................................................     7
        Prepared statement...........................................    55

    McBride, Martina.................................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................    57

    Price, Christen..................................................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    59

                                    APPENDIX

    Items submitted for the record...................................    69

                        THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY:
                         AI-GENERATED DEEPFAKES IN 2025

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2025

                          United States Senate,
                  Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology,
                                           and the Law,
                                    Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m., in
    Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marsha
    Blackburn, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Blackburn [presiding], Hawley, Tillis,
    Moody, Klobuchar, and Coons.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

        Chair Blackburn. The Senate Judiciary Committee on Privacy,
    Technology, and the Law will come to order.
        And I want to thank all of you for being here with us this
    afternoon. As you can see, everyone is curious about AI. And
    today, we are going to talk about AI and how this affects our
    content creators, our creative community, our children, and how
    it affects all Americans when it comes to the digital space and
    what happens with AI-generated deepfakes.
        This hearing is titled ``The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,''
    and it is titled in that regard for a specific reason. Now in
    Tennessee, we talk about there is a lot of good that has come
    from AI when you are talking about logistics, advanced
    manufacturing, healthcare, cutting-edge research, and we've
    even seen the amazing role that AI has played in giving voice
    to some, Randy Travis to be specific, who joined us here on the
    Hill recently in introducing the NO FAKES bill. It gave Randy
    Travis the ability to share his talent with the world once
    again.
        And despite some of these benefits, there are really some
    bad and unpleasant sides to AI, and specifically when it comes
    to AI-generated deepfakes. These deepfakes cause tremendous
    harm, and today, we are going to examine those harms and the
    legislative solutions, including the NO FAKES Act that Senators
    Coons, Klobuchar, Tillis, and I have introduced. We have
    introduced them specifically to address these harms.
        First, these deepfakes pose significant harm to our content
    creators, from Music Row to Beale Street, back over to the
    Smoky Mountains in Upper East Tennessee. Tennesseans have made
    their mark in the music world, and we've got one of those
    artists with us today. But the proliferation of these digital
    replicas created without the artist's consent pose a real
    threat to their livelihoods and the livelihoods of all American
    artists and creators.
        The NO FAKES Act is a monumental step forward in protecting
    our creative community. It provides landmark protection of the
    voice and visual likenesses of all individuals and creators
    from the spread of these digital replicas that are created
    without their consent. And I am looking forward to speaking
    with our witnesses about this critical bill and how impactful
    it will be for the creative community.
        And I have got to be clear, our efforts must protect all
    Americans from the harms of deepfakes, and that includes our
    precious children. In recent years, we have seen a deeply
    troubling spike in the use of generative AI to create sexually
    explicit deepfake content. Just as concerning, NCMEC saw a--get
    this number--1,325 percent increase from 2023 to 2024 in
    reports involving generative AI. We have got to do something
    about that, and both the NO FAKES Act and the TAKE IT DOWN Act,
    which President Trump just signed into law this week, go a long
    way to providing greater protections for our children from
    these deepfakes.
        These deepfakes have also served as a powerful tool for
    fraud. In one example, scammers used AI-generated images and
    voices of a multinational firm CEO to steal millions of
    dollars. We've also seen celebrities' likenesses
    misappropriated in false product endorsements.
        It is clear that Congress has to act, and that's why the
    three of us sitting right here on this dais have joined forces,
    plus Senator Tillis, who is going to get here in a little bit,
    to work on the NO FAKES Act and get it to President Trump's
    desk this year. We know that the creative community, all these
    content creators, our children, and all Americans deserve
    nothing less than our best efforts on this issue.
        And I turn to Senator Klobuchar for her opening statement.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Senator Blackburn.
    I am very excited about this Subcommittee and the work we have
    already done together for years on this issue and similar
    issues when it comes to tech.
        I share your hopes for AI and see that we are on this cusp
    of amazing advancements if this is harnessed in the right way.
    But I am also concerned if things go the wrong way. I think it
    was Jim Brooks, a columnist, that said he has trouble writing
    about it because he doesn't know if it will take us to heaven
    or hell. So it is our job to head to heaven, and it is our job
    to put some rules in place. And this is certainly one of them.
    We want this to work for children, for consumers, for artists,
    and not against them.
        And you brought up the example, Chair, of Randy Travis, who
    was at the event that we recently had with you and Senator
    Coons and myself about the bill and how he used AI in such a
    positive way. But then we know there are these risks.
        And one of the things that I think is really exciting about
    this week is that, in fact, on Monday, the President signed my
    bill with Senator Cruz, the TAKE IT DOWN Act, into law. This
    was a bill I discussed with him and the First Lady at the
    inaugural lunch. It is an example of use every moment you have
    to advance a cause. And then she supported the bill and hoped
    to get it passed in the House. Senator Cruz and I had already
    passed it in the Senate, and we were having some trouble
    getting it done over in the House. So we are really pleased
    because it actually does set some track moving forward, even
    though that bill is about nonconsensual porn, both AI-created
    and non-AI-created.
        It has had huge harmful effects, about 20-some suicides a
    year of young kids who think they are sending a picture
    innocently to a girlfriend or a potential boyfriend, and then
    it gets sent out on their school internet. It gets sent out to
    people they know, and basically they believe their life is in
    ruins and don't have any other context and take their own
    lives. And that is just the most obvious and frightful part of
    this, but there are others as well. So I am hoping this is
    going to be a first step to some of the work that we can do,
    including with the bill that we are going to be discussing
    today.
        So AI-enabled scams have become far too common. We know
    that. It takes only a few seconds of audio to clone a voice.
    Criminals can pull the audio sample and personal backstory from
    public sources. Just last week, the FBI was forced to put out
    an alert about scams using AI-cloned voices of FBI agents and
    officials asking people for sensitive payment information.
        Jamie Lee Curtis was forced to make a public appeal to Mark
    Zuckerberg to take down an unauthorized deepfake ad that
    included her digital replica endorsing a dental product. While
    Meta removed the ad after her direct outreach, most people
    don't have that kind of influence.
        We also need rules of the road to ensure that AI
    technologies empower artists and creators and not undermine
    them. Art just doesn't entertain us. It is something that
    uplifts us and brings us together. When I recently met with
    Cory Wong, a Grammy-nominated artist from Minnesota, he talked
    about how unauthorized digital replicas threaten artists'
    livelihoods and undermine their ability to create art.
        So this is not just a personal issue; it is also an
    economic issue. One of the reasons our country, one of our best
    exports to the world is music and movies. When you look at the
    numbers and how we have been able to captivate people around
    the world, that is going to go away if people can just copy
    everything that we do. And one of the keys to our success as a
    Nation in innovation has been the fact--and Senator Coons does
    a lot of work in this area. We have been able to respect
    copyrights and patents and people own the rights to their own
    products.
        So that is why this NO FAKES Act is so important. It
    protects people from having their voice and likeness replicated
    using AI without their permission, all within the framework of
    the Constitution. And it protects everybody because everyone
    should have a right to privacy.
        I also am working in the space on AI to put some base rules
    in place in my role on the Commerce Committee. Senator Thune
    and I have a bill that we are reintroducing on this to set some
    rules for NIST to be able to put out there for companies that
    are using AI. And then I am always concerned about its effect
    on democracy. But that is for a different day and in a
    different Committee.
        But I do want to thank Senator Blackburn for her
    willingness to come out on doing something about tech,
    including the work she does with Senator Blumenthal, the work
    that we have done together on Commerce. And if Monday is any
    sign with the first bill getting through, and they are in that
    Rose Garden signing ceremony, there is more to come. And so
    thank you, and I look forward to hearing from the witnesses.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar.
        Senator Coons, you are recognized.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

        Senator Coons. Thank you so much, Chair Blackburn, Ranking
    Member Klobuchar. It is a delight to work with you. And thank
    you for inviting me to give some brief opening remarks about
    the NO FAKES bill.
        Because of you and Senator Tillis working on this together
    since 2023, we have made real progress. There is momentum with
    this bill. We have been adding co-sponsors. My thanks to
    Senators Durbin and Hagerty, Schiff and Cassidy. We are adding
    organizations that are endorsing it like YouTube and RAINN. And
    as we saw at the White House on Monday, if there is bipartisan
    agreement in Congress and support from the White House that
    action is needed, we can make progress in complex, challenging
    technical areas.
        This hearing is a chance to look critically at the current
    State of the NO FAKES bill so we can both build on that
    momentum and answer the questions, what did we get right? What
    do we need to tweak? How can we get more co-sponsors and push
    to a Full Committee markup?
        So I am excited to hear from our witnesses today. There are
    two other Committee hearings going on right now, which is why
    you will see Senators come in and out, not a lack of interest.
        Senator Klobuchar. Or be late.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Coons. Yes. When we were drafting this bill, its
    applicability to pillars of the creative community like Ms.
    McBride, Martina McBride, or to a movie star like Tom Hanks,
    its applicability to people who make a living off of their
    voice or likeness was clear. But Senator Blackburn and I agreed
    at the outset, the rules we were drafting should apply to
    everyone. Everyone should have the power to control their
    digital replica online, not just those who are superstars.
        So I appreciate, Chair Blackburn, the witnesses you brought
    together today speak to the full scope of what this bill can do
    to keep the public safe from scams, just like the bill Senator
    Klobuchar just got signed into law, and help wipe nonconsensual
    deepfake pornography off the internet.
        Second, the revised draft we introduced last month was the
    product of stakeholders negotiating in good faith. Ms. Carlos,
    you and YouTube came to the table with the intention of getting
    to yes, and we got there. And if Google can get behind this
    bill, can handle the obligations that NO FAKES impose, so can
    the other tech platforms.
        Thank you. I look forward to hearing from you and returning
    to questions.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        I would like to introduce our witnesses. Martina McBride is
    a Nashville-based singer-songwriter who has sold more than 23
    million albums worldwide with six singles hitting number one on
    the country music chart.
        In addition to her 14 Grammy Award nominations, Ms. McBride
    is a four-time Country Music Association Female Vocalist of the
    Year, a three-time Academy of Country Music Top Female
    Vocalist, and a member of the Grand Ole Opry. She first signed
    to RCA Records in 1991 and has since been awarded 14 gold
    records, 12 platinum honors, 3 double platinum records, and 2
    triple platinum awards.
        Mitch Glazier is the CEO and chairman of the Recording
    Industry Association of America. We use the acronym RIAA. He
    helps to represent the rights and interests of over 1,600
    member labels. Prior to joining RIAA, Mr. Glazier served as
    Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property to the U.S. House of
    Representatives Judiciary Committee, as well as numerous other
    roles in and around government, including as a commercial
    litigation associate. He earned his bachelor's degree from
    Northwestern University and his JD from Vanderbilt School of
    Law.
        Our next witness is Christen Price. Ms. Price serves as
    Senior Legal Counsel for the National Center for Sexual
    Exploitation NCOSE. Correct? And she works to combat all forms
    of sexual exploitation and advocate for justice for survivors
    of sex trafficking, child sexual abuse, pornography, and
    prostitution.
        Before her work at NCOSE, Ms. Price served as legal counsel
    at the Alliance Defending Freedom, where she specialized in
    First Amendment law and conscious protections. Ms. Price earned
    her bachelor's degree from Cedarville University and her JD
    from Georgetown University Law Center.
        And Mr. Justin Brookman, Mr. Brookman is the Director of
    Technology Policy for Consumer Reports, where he specializes in
    data privacy and security issues. Before joining Consumer
    Reports, he was Policy Director of the Federal Trade Commission
    Office of Technology, Research, and Investigation. Earlier in
    his career, he served as Chief of the Internet Bureau of the
    New York Attorney General's Office. He earned his bachelor's
    degree from University of Virginia and his JD from New York
    University School of Law.
        And Ms. Suzana Carlos, who serves as Head of Music Policy
    at YouTube. Until 2022, she served as Senior Counsel for
    YouTube's Music Publishing and in senior positions at the
    American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers--we like
    to call it ASCAP-Universal Music Group and EMI Publishing. She
    is also on the board of Digital Media Association, which
    represents the leading global audio streaming companies and
    promotes legal access and engagement of music content between
    creators and users. Ms. Carlos earned her bachelor's at the
    University of California, Los Angeles, and her JD from Fordham
    University School of Law. Welcome to each of you.
        At this time, I want to ask you all to rise and raise your
    right hands.
        [Witnesses are sworn in.]
        Chair Blackburn. And let the record reflect that everyone
    is in the affirmative.
        We will begin with our testimony. Ms. McBride, you are
    recognized for 5 minutes and welcome.

       STATEMENT OF MARTINA McBRIDE, MULTIPLATINUM COUNTRY MUSIC
                SINGER-SONGWRITER, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE

        Ms. McBride. Chairman Blackburn, Ranking Member Klobuchar,
    Senator Coons, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
    inviting me to speak about S. 1367, the NO FAKES Act of 2025, a
    landmark effort to protect human voices and likenesses from
    being cloned by artificial intelligence without consent. I am
    so grateful for the care that went into this effort, and I want
    to thank you and your colleagues for making this issue a
    priority.
        I started singing when I was 4 years old, and my voice is
    at the center of my art form. Each of my recordings includes a
    piece of me that is individual and unique. Songs reflect the
    human experience, and I am honored that they are a part of
    people's lives, from wedding vows to breakups to celebrating
    milestones and even the special relationship between a mother
    and daughter.
        But today, my voice and likeness, along with so many
    others, are at risk. AI technology is amazing and can be used
    for so many wonderful purposes. But like all great
    technologies, it can also be abused. In this case, by stealing
    people's voices and likenesses to scare and defraud families,
    manipulate the images of young girls in ways that are
    unconscionable, impersonate government officials, or make phony
    recordings posing as artists like me. It is frightening, and it
    is wrong.
        Congress just took a very important step forward to deal
    with sexually explicit deepfake images by passing the TAKE IT
    DOWN Act. I want to thank all the leaders, including Senators
    Cruz, Klobuchar, Blackburn, and many on this Committee who
    worked hard with others to push that bill into law.
        The NO FAKES Act is a perfect complement to that effort by
    preventing AI deepfakes that steal someone's voice or likeness
    and use them to harass, bully, and defraud others or to damage
    their career, reputation, or values. The NO FAKES Act would
    give each of us the ability to say when and how AI deepfakes of
    our voices and likenesses can be used. If someone doesn't ask
    before posting a harmful deepfake, we can have it removed
    without jumping through unnecessary hoops or going to court.
        It gives every person the power to say yes or no about how
    their most personal human attributes are used. It supports AI
    technology by providing a roadmap for how these powerful tools
    can be developed in the right way. And it doesn't stand in the
    way of protected uses like news, parodies, or criticism.
        I want to thank the technology companies like OpenAI and
    Google who support this bill, as well as the legions of
    creators who have worked so hard to advocate for it and the
    Child Protection and Anti-Sex Trafficking and Exploitation
    groups who support it and continue to fight for those who are
    most vulnerable.
        In my career, it has been a special honor to record songs
    that shine a light on the battles that many women fight,
    especially the terrible battle of domestic violence. Many fans
    have told me that the song ``Independence Day'' has given them
    strength. And in some cases, the song has been the catalyst
    that has made them realize that they need to leave an abusive
    situation. Imagine the harm that an AI deepfake could do,
    breaching that trust using my voice in songs that belittle or
    justify abuse.
        One of the things I am most proud of in my career is I have
    tried to conduct myself with integrity and authenticity. And
    the thought that my voice could be deepfaked or my likeness
    could be deepfaked to go against everything that I have built,
    to go against my character, is just terrifying. And I am
    pleading with you to give me the tools to stop that kind of
    betrayal.
        Setting America on the right course to develop the world's
    best AI while preserving the sacred qualities that make our
    country so special--authenticity, integrity, humanity, and our
    endlessly inspiring spirit--that is what the NO FAKES Act will
    help to accomplish. I urge you to pass the bill now.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. McBride appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Blackburn. We thank you.
        Mr. Glazier, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF MITCH GLAZIER, CEO, RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
                      OF AMERICA, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Mr. Glazier. Thank you so much. Thank you for having me. I
    am honored to testify today alongside the groundbreaking
    artist, Martina McBride, who just spoke so eloquently about the
    value of someone's voice, the value of their image, and the
    threats posed by abuses of deepfake technology.
        I would also like to recognize the almost 400 artists and
    performers and actors who have just signed a statement in
    support of the NO FAKES Act with some very simple words. It is
    your voice, your face, your image, your identity. Protect your
    individuality. That is why we are here. That is what this is
    all about.
        Artists' voices and likenesses are fundamental to their
    work, credibility, expression, careers. In many ways, these
    deeply personal, highly valuable attributes are the foundations
    of the entire music ecosystem. And unauthorized exploitation of
    them using deepfakes does cause devastating harm. We have to
    prevent that harm.
        So my deepest thanks and the thanks of a very grateful
    music community go out to all of you, to Chairman Blackburn, to
    Ranking Member Klobuchar, to Senator Coons, and to all of the
    Senators, Senators Tillis, Hagerty, Durbin, Cassidy, Schiff,
    and I hope many more on this Committee and throughout the
    Senate for introducing and supporting the NO FAKES Act.
        You did it. After months, actually years, of work with each
    other, stakeholders, your counterparts in the House, you have
    been able to build bipartisan, bicameral, broad-based consensus
    around legislation that will protect not just artists but all
    victims of deepfake abuses, including child exploitation and
    voice clone scams, which we will hear about from the other
    witnesses today.
        You have shaped a commonsense bill that has won the support
    of AI companies like Google, who is here today, OpenAI, IBM, as
    well as broadcasters, motion picture studios, child protection
    groups, free market groups, labor unions, and virtually the
    entire creative community. That is hard to do.
        The NO FAKES Act provides balanced yet effective
    protections for all Americans while supporting free speech,
    reducing litigation, and promoting the development of AI
    technology. It empowers individuals to have unlawful deepfakes
    removed from UGC platforms as soon as it can be done without
    requiring anyone to hire lawyers or go to court in those
    situations. It contains clear exemptions for uses typically
    protected by the First Amendment, such as parody, news
    reporting, and critical commentary. And it encourages AI
    development and innovation, targeting only malicious
    applications and setting the stage for the legitimate licensing
    of rights with real and meaningful consent.
        NO FAKES is the perfect next step to build on after the
    TAKE IT DOWN Act. It provides a civil remedy to victims of
    invasive harm that go beyond the criminal posting of intimate
    images addressed by that legislation and protects artists like
    Martina from nonconsensual deepfakes and voice clones that
    breach the trust she has built with millions of fans.
        American music is the most valuable music in the world. We
    lead in investment, exports, and market power. Music drives the
    success of other important American industries, including the
    technology industry, through thriving partnerships. If we
    signal to the rest of the world that it is acceptable to steal
    Americans' voices and likenesses, we have the most to lose. Our
    voices and our music are the most popular and will be taken the
    most, destabilizing the music economy, our intellectual
    property system, our national identity, and the very humanity
    of the individuals who bless us with their genius.
        The NO FAKES Act is a critical step in setting America up
    as an example and to continue and extend its global leadership
    in innovation and creativity. It shows that we can boost AI
    development while preserving every individual's autonomy, all
    individual liberties, and protect our constitutional property
    rights at the same time.
        We are really proud to support this legislation, and we vow
    to help you pass it into law this year. Thank you again.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Glazier appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Blackburn. We thank you.
        And Ms. Price, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF CHRISTEN PRICE, SENIOR LEGAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL
        CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION (NCOSE), WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Ms. Price. Chair Blackburn, Ranking Member Klobuchar, thank
    you for holding this hearing and addressing this truly urgent
    matter. My name is Christen Price, Senior Legal Counsel at the
    National Center on Sexual Exploitation, NCOSE, a nonpartisan
    nonprofit dedicated to eradicating all forms of sexual
    exploitation by exposing the links between them. Our law center
    represents survivors in lawsuits against those who perpetrate,
    enable, and profit from sex trafficking, including pornography
    companies.
        Contemporary pornography depicts and normalizes violence,
    including asphyxiation, electrocution, and rape. This is
    pervasive. The top four sites--Pornhub, XVideos, xHamster, and
    XNXX--had nearly 60 billion total visits in 2024. One woman's
    husband sexually assaulted her while she was sleeping and put
    the video on XVideos, which was tagged ``Sleeping Pills.''
    Pornhub hosts child sexual abuse material and sex trafficking
    content with their employees admitting that traffickers use
    their sites with impunity.
        Forged or deepfake pornography uses AI that is trained on
    this kind of abusive content, merging it with the faces of
    other women and girls. A 2023 report found that deepfake
    pornography increased by 464 percent between 2022 and 2023. The
    top 10 deepfake pornography sites had 300 million video views
    in 2023. Ninety-eight percent of all deepfake videos are
    pornography related, and 99 percent of those who are targeted
    are women.
        The perpetrators are disproportionately male. One survey
    found that 74 percent of deepfake pornography users don't feel
    guilty about it. A high schooler discovered a boy she had never
    met took a photo off of her Instagram, created an AI deepfake,
    and circulated it through Snapchat. Two years later, she still
    hasn't been able to remove all the images.
        A woman whose close family friend made deepfake pornography
    of her said, ``My only crime was existing online and sharing
    photos on platforms like Instagram. The person who did this was
    not a stranger. I was not hacked, and my social media has never
    been public.''
        These are serious human rights abuses, violating the person
    whose face is depicted and the person whose body is shown.
    Survivors report fear; isolation; shame; powerlessness;
    suicidal thoughts; doxxing; harassment from sex buyers; and
    difficulty attending school, maintaining jobs, and
    participating in public life. This is a form of sexual
    exploitation from which it is impossible to fully exit.
        There is a very old idea that to protect more privileged
    women from male violence, society needs an underclass of women
    that men can violate with impunity. This was always a morally
    inexcusable premise, and the rise of forged pornography shows
    that it is also a lie. Deepfake technology allows any man to
    turn any woman into his pornography. These are impossible
    conditions for equality. As Andrew Dworkin stated in his book,
    ``The civil impact of pornography on women is staggering. It
    keeps us socially silent, socially compliant. It keeps us
    afraid in neighborhoods and it creates a vast hopelessness for
    women, a vast despair. One lives inside a nightmare of sexual
    abuse that is both actual and potential, and you have the great
    joy of knowing that your nightmare is someone else's freedom
    and someone else's fun.''
        The harms are severe and irreversible, so deterrence is
    essential. This is why NCOSE supported the bipartisan effort to
    pass the TAKE IT DOWN Act, which the President signed into law
    on Monday, and requires online platforms to remove
    nonconsensual content within 48 hours of being notified.
        NCOSE strongly supports three additional bills that
    complement TAKE IT DOWN, the NO FAKES Act, the Kids Online
    Safety Act and the DEFIANCE Act. These bills help protect
    individuals from the harmful effects of image-based sexual
    abuse and increase pressure on tech companies to manage
    websites more responsibly.
        Finally, NCOSE is concerned about the recent AI State
    moratorium language included in the House Budget Reconciliation
    bill, as it creates a disincentive for AI companies to put
    safety first.
        Technological progress should not come at the expense of
    human dignity. It is our collective responsibility to protect
    the voice, face, and likeness of every person from unauthorized
    use.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Price appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Blackburn. We thank you.
        And I will note for the record that we are submitting your
    full testimony into the record with all of your footnotes. I
    really appreciate that. Thank you so much.
        Mr. Brookman, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

     STATEMENT OF JUSTIN BROOKMAN, DIRECTOR OF TECHNOLOGY POLICY,
                   CONSUMER REPORTS, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Mr. Brookman. Thank you, Chairwoman Blackburn, Ranking
    Member Klobuchar. Thank you very much for the opportunity to
    get to testify here today.
        I am here on behalf of Consumer Reports, where I head up
    our work on tech policy advocacy. We are the world's largest
    independent testing organization. We use our ratings, our
    journalism, our surveys, our advocacy to try to create a more
    fair, healthier, and safer world.
        I am gratified the Committee is focusing on the problems
    created by audio and video deepfakes, which, for better or
    worse, are getting more realistic and convincing every day.
    They are used in romance scams and grandparent scams where a
    relative gets a frantic call from a distressed family member
    who is in immediate need of cash. As the Chairwoman noted, they
    are used in fake testimonial videos from celebrities hawking
    everything from meme coins to cookware. I believe Elon Musk is
    one of the most frequently impersonated celebrities online.
        As Ms. Price testified eloquently, obviously, one of the
    most prevalent uses is for the creation of nonconsensual
    intimate images and videos. And they are increasingly used to
    propagate misinformation, certainly in the political realm, but
    also in the more petty personal realm. There is a story in
    Maryland recently about an aggrieved teacher who created
    deepfake audio of his boss saying racist and antisemitic slurs.
    As this last example shows, realistic cloning tools are easily
    available to the public and very cheap and easy to use.
        Earlier this year, Consumer Reports conducted a study of
    six voice-cloning tools that are easy to find online to see how
    easy it would be to create fake audio based on a public
    recording like a YouTube clip. Our study found that four of the
    six companies we looked at didn't employ any reasonable
    technical mechanisms to reasonably ensure they had the consent
    of the person whose voice was being cloned. Instead, the
    customer just had to click, like, yes, I have the person's
    consent. Two require the person to read a script to help
    indicate the person was onboard with having their voice cloned.
    Four of the companies also did not collect much identifying
    information from customers, just a name or an email address to
    start creating deepfake voice clones.
        Given how likely abuse of these services are, I don't think
    they were doing enough. And a lot of our members agree. We
    recently got 55,000 signatures on a recent petition asking the
    Federal Trade Commission and State Attorneys General to
    investigate whether these services were in violation of
    existing consumer protection laws.
        And that brings me to solutions. So one thing, we need
    strong consumer protection agencies who have the resources to
    crack down on abusive emerging technologies. Last year, the FTC
    brought a handful of AI cases as part of Operation AIs' Comply,
    but they don't have the capacity right now to confront the
    massive wave of scams and abuses online.
        Tools and responsibilities, I think some of these AI-
    powered tools are designed such that they are almost always
    going to be used for illegitimate purposes, whether it is
    deepfake pornographic image generators or voice impersonation.
    Developers of these tools need to have heightened obligations
    to try to forestall harmful uses. If they can't do that, then
    maybe they should not be freely available to the public.
        Platforms too need to be doing more to proactively get
    harmful material off their platforms. It is a very difficult
    job. It takes resources, but it absolutely needs to be done.
        Transparency: People deserve to know whether the content
    they are seeing online is real or fake. I know there have been
    a number of bills introduced in this Congress to try to address
    that. Also, there is a law recently passed in California to
    start to put transparency obligations on entities that make
    deepfake content.
        Stronger privacy and security laws: As this Committee knows
    very well, the United States generally has fairly weak legal
    protections. As the Ranking Member noted, the ready
    availability of information about us online makes it easier for
    scammers to target us with scams. We have seen a ton of
    progress at the State level on privacy and security laws, but
    they are not strong enough.
        Whistleblower protections and incentives: In many cases, we
    only find out about abuses inside these tech companies when
    someone comes forward with their story. I was glad to see
    bipartisan legislation introduced on this issue protecting AI
    whistleblowers in the last week.
        Education: I don't want to put all the burden on consumers,
    but the reality is this is the world we live in. We need to
    teach people to look out for these sorts of scams. We are part
    of a campaign called Pause Take9, which tries to train people
    that if they get an urgent call to action, they should pause,
    take 9 seconds, think about if this is real or not.
        And finally, I want to echo the words of Ms. Price about a
    lot of discussion about a moratorium on State laws policing bad
    uses of AI. I want to stress this is the wrong idea. AI has
    tremendous, amazing potential, but as this hearing shows, it
    has some real potential harms as well. The States have been
    leaders in trying to address these harms, whether it is
    privacy, co-opting performers' identities, regulating self-
    driving cars, rooting out hidden biases, other deepfakes. AI is
    an incredibly powerful technology, but that does not mean it
    should be completely unregulated.
        Thank you very much, and I look forward to answering your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Brookman appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Blackburn. And Ms. Carlos, you are recognized for 5
    minutes.

      STATEMENT OF SUZANA CARLOS, HEAD OF MUSIC POLICY, YOUTUBE,
                           BROOKLYN, NEW YORK

        Ms. Carlos. Chairwoman Blackburn, Ranking Member Klobuchar,
    and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity
    to speak with you today on the important topic of the NO FAKES
    Act and AI-generated digital replicas. My name is Suzana
    Carlos, and I serve as the Head of Music Policy for YouTube.
        Just last month, YouTube marked the 20th anniversary of the
    first video ever uploaded to our platform. It is difficult to
    fathom how much the world and YouTube have changed in those 2
    short decades. Today, we have over 2 billion active monthly
    members on our platform across more than 100 countries, with
    500 hours of content uploaded every minute. We are proud that
    YouTube has transformed culture through video and built a
    thriving creator economy here in the United States and around
    the world.
        Our unique and industry-leading revenue-sharing model
    empowers our creators to take 55 percent of the revenue earned
    against ads on their content. And as a result, YouTube's
    creative economy has contributed more than $55 billion to the
    United States' gross domestic product and supported more than
    490,000 full-time American jobs in the last year alone. In the
    3 years prior to January 2024, YouTube paid more than $70
    billion to creators, artists, and media companies.
        At YouTube Music, we built one of the world's deepest
    catalogs, over 100 million official tracks, plus remixes, live
    performances, covers, and hard-to-find music you simply can't
    find anywhere else. We have now reached over 125 million paid
    YouTube music and premium subscribers. And YouTube continues to
    be at the forefront of handling rights management at scale,
    protecting the intellectual property of creators and our
    content partners, ensuring that they can monetize their content
    and keeping YouTube free for viewers around the world.
        In 2007, YouTube launched Content ID, a first-of-its-kind
    copyright management system that helps rightsholders
    effectively manage their works. Rightsholders or their agents
    provide YouTube with reference files for their works they own,
    along with metadata, such as title and detailed ownership
    rights. And based on these references, YouTube creates digital
    fingerprints for those works in question and scans the platform
    to determine when content in an uploaded video matches the
    reference content. Rightsholders can instruct the system to
    block, monetize, or track the reference content. And over 99
    percent of the copyright issues on YouTube are handled through
    Content ID. It has also proven to be an effective revenue
    generation tool for rightsholders, as over 90 percent of
    Content ID claims are monetized.
        And as we navigate the evolving world of AI, we understand
    the importance of collaborating with partners to tackle
    emerging challenges proactively. We firmly believe that AI can
    and will supercharge human creativity, not replace it.
        Indeed, AI has the potential to amplify and augment human
    creativity, unlocking new opportunities for artists, creators,
    journalists, musicians, and consumers to engage creatively with
    new tools and play an active role in innovation. We are already
    seeing creators exploring new areas, including the creation of
    new types of music, books, photography, clothing, pottery,
    games, and other art inspired in collaboration with AI models.
    And as this technology evolves, we must collectively ensure
    that it is used responsibly, including when it comes to
    protecting our creators and viewers.
        Platforms have a responsibility to address the challenges
    posed by AI-generated content, and Google and YouTube stand
    ready to apply our expertise to help tackle them on our
    services and across the digital ecosystem.
        We know that a practical regulatory framework addressing
    digital replicas is critical, and that is why we are especially
    grateful to Chairwoman Blackburn, Senator Coons, Ranking Member
    Klobuchar, and all the bill sponsors for the smart and
    thoughtful approach adopted in developing the NO FAKES Act of
    2025. We deeply appreciate their willingness to bring a variety
    of stakeholders together to forge a consensus on this important
    topic.
        YouTube and Google are proud to support this legislation,
    which tackles the problems of harm associated with unauthorized
    digital replicas and provides a clear legal framework to
    address these challenges and protect individuals' rights. The
    NO FAKES Act appropriately balances innovation, creative
    expression, and individuals' rights while offering a broadly
    workable, tech-neutral, and comprehensive legal solution. By
    supplanting the need for a patchwork of inconsistent legal
    frameworks, the NO FAKES Act would streamline global operations
    for platforms like ours and empower artists and rightsholders
    to better manage their likeness online. We look forward to
    seeing the legislation passed by Congress and enacted into law.
        We have similarly proudly supported the TAKE IT DOWN Act
    because it is critical to prevent bad actors from producing and
    disseminating nonconsensual explicit images. We would like to
    thank Ranking Member Klobuchar, along with Senator Cruz, for
    their leadership on the legislation. This is an area we
    continue to invest in at Google, building our longstanding
    policies and protections to ultimately keep people safe online.
        Thank you again for inviting me to participate in today's
    hearing. I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Carlos appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Blackburn. And we thank you all for sticking to the
    5-minute clock. I didn't have to gavel down a person.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Blackburn. These are great content creators, I mean,
    so there we go.
        I am going to recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions.
        And as Senator Coons said earlier, there are going to be
    Members coming and going because we do have a variety of
    hearings that are going on.
        Ms. McBride, I want to come to you first. I think that your
    perspective is such an important perspective as we talk about
    this and talk on the direct impact to someone who is creating
    content. And I appreciated so much that in your testimony, you
    talked about how your voice and likeness, along with so many
    other creators, that that is at risk. And therefore, your
    livelihood is at risk.
        So talk a little bit about how harmful deepfakes are in the
    long term and why it is important to get legislation like this
    to the President's desk. And then talk about fellow artists
    that you have spoken with and their concerns on the issue.
        Ms. McBride. Well, as you said, it does affect livelihood
    for musicians, backup singers, voiceover actors, authors, like
    so many people in the arts. For me, being established and
    having done this for over 30 years, that's not necessarily my
    first concern. I have the luxury of that not being my first
    concern, but it is a concern for younger artists that are
    coming up.
        So as I said in my testimony, the thing that I am most
    concerned with personally is how we work so hard to present
    ourselves with integrity and a certain character. And the fact
    that, you know, long term, that could be distorted or
    manipulated to be the opposite of what I stand for and what I
    believe or to be used to cause harm to someone through
    endorsing a harmful product or, you know, far into the future,
    after I am gone, somebody creating a piece of music or me
    saying something that I never did. And it just kind of like
    disintegrating what I have worked so hard to establish, which
    is trust with my fans, with people who, you know, when I say
    something, they believe it.
        I think for younger artists, to your point of livelihood,
    to be new and having to set up what you stand for and who you
    are as a person, as an artist, what you endorse, what you
    believe in, and establishing a trust with your fans, and then
    on top of it, having to navigate these waters of someone coming
    in and distorting all of that is devastating. Like, I don't
    know how--I can't stress enough how it can impact the careers
    of up-and-coming artists and even just in their ability to, you
    know, speak their truth or just to live in fear of being a
    victim of these deepfakes.
        Chair Blackburn. Yes. Mr. Glazier, I want to come to you on
    something you mentioned about the critical balance of
    protecting the artists' voices and likenesses and then also
    reducing litigation. And that is why we need to have this
    framework. And I think helping artists stay out of court, I
    mean, they're at a point where they may have to spend much of
    what they have earned in order to protect themselves and to
    protect their brand, if you will, if you will elaborate on
    that.
        Mr. Glazier. Sure, I am happy to. The bill has to be
    effective and practical at the same time, both for the victim
    and for the platform who is going to limit the damage to the
    victim. It has to work on both ends. And that is why I think
    the approach that was taken both in the TAKE IT DOWN Act and in
    this act are so important, especially in areas where the
    platform has less knowledge and less control because end users
    are posting on the platform. And those can go viral very, very
    quickly.
        The ability for the platform to take it down as soon as,
    you know, technically and practically feasible so that they
    stop the damage and to keep it down so that the artist or any
    other victim doesn't have to spend their lives monitoring a
    platform and continually sending more notices and more notices
    as end users keep putting up the same material over and over
    and over again. We now have tools that will allow the removal
    off of the platform. And once the removal is done, the damage
    can be limited. There is no liability for the platform, and the
    artist doesn't have to spend their time just litigating.
        Where there is more knowledge and control, right, where the
    platform has an employee upload it, for example, then there
    should be responsibility on the platform. And those are cases
    where you might need to go to court because the platform could
    have prevented it, and they didn't prevent it.
        So I think the bill is incredibly balanced and really
    innovative in its approach to protecting free speech, reducing
    litigation, but also effectively protecting the right that is
    necessary.
        Chair Blackburn. Senator Klobuchar, you are recognized.
        Senator Klobuchar. All right. Thank you very much. I guess
    I will start with Mr. Brookman, the non-Grammy winner.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Klobuchar. And I want to talk to you just a little
    bit about this consumer angle here, which I think is
    interesting to people. And I think at its core, all of us
    involved in this legislation have made it really clear that it
    is not just people who are well known that will be hurt by this
    eventually and that getting this bill passed as soon as
    possible is just as important for everyone.
        But I do so appreciate Ms. McBride's being willing to come
    forward because those stories and the stories that we have
    heard from, like I mentioned, Jamie Lee Curtis or the stories
    that we have heard from many celebrities are very important to
    getting this done.
        So you just did a report, AI-generated voice cloning scams,
    including that AI voice cloning applications, in the words of
    the report, ``presents a clear opportunity for scammers.'' And
    we need to make sure our consumer protection enforcers are
    prepared to respond to the growing threat of these scams. I had
    this happen to my State Director's husband, who their kid is in
    the Marines and they got a call. They figured out that it
    wasn't really him asking for stuff and money. They knew he
    couldn't call from where he was deployed to. But this is just
    going to be happening all over the place. And the next call
    will be to a grandma who thinks it is real and she sends her
    life savings in.
        So I have called on the FTC and the FCC to step up their
    efforts to prevent these voice cloning scams. And what are some
    of the tools that agencies need to crack down on these scams,
    even outside of this bill?
        Mr. Brookman. Yes, absolutely. So I think the first thing
    that the Federal Trade Commission probably needs is more
    resources. They only have like 1,200 people right now for the
    entire economy. That is down from 100 just in the past couple
    of months.
        Senator Klobuchar. Way down from even during like the Nixon
    era.
        Mr. Brookman. Yes, like 1,700 it used to be and the economy
    has grown like three or four times. Chairman Ferguson has said
    more cuts are coming, which I think is the wrong direction. I
    worked at the Federal Trade Commission for a couple of years.
    We could not do like a fraction of all the things that we
    wanted to do to protect consumers. So people, more capacity,
    more technologists, like there is just not enough technology
    capacity in government.
        I was in the Office of Technology, Research, and
    Investigation there. That was like five people. That is just
    not enough. Obviously, with all these very sophisticated--I
    mean, just, just deepfakes alone, let alone the rest of the
    tech economy. The ability to get penalties and even injunctive
    relief, right? If someone gets caught stealing something, the
    FTC often doesn't have the ability to make them give the money
    back.
        Senator Klobuchar. Yes.
        Mr. Brookman. I know this Committee has tried to restore
    that authority, but that would be important.
        And also like, you know, again, maybe it is clear, FTC
    could have rulemaking authority, but also I would like to see
    Congress consider legislative authority to address tools. Like,
    again, if you are offering a tool that can be used only for
    harm, voice impersonation, deepfake pornographic images, maybe
    there should be responsibilities to make sure it is not being
    used for harm.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you.
        Ms. Carlos, can you talk about what YouTube is doing to
    ensure it is not facilitating these scams?
        Ms. Carlos. Sure. And thank you for the question, Senator.
        Senator Klobuchar. And thanks for your support for the
    bill.
        Ms. Carlos. Of course. So just to primarily consider, we
    obviously see great and tremendous opportunity coming from AI,
    but we also acknowledge that there are risks, and it is our
    utmost responsibility to ensure that it is deployed
    responsibly. So we have taken a number of efforts to protect
    against unharmful contact on our platform. Primarily, we have
    updated our privacy policies last year to ensure that all
    individuals can now submit a notice to YouTube when their
    unauthorized voice or likeness has been used on our platform.
    And once reviewed, it is applicable and we have confirmed that
    that content should be removed, we will take it down.
        We have additionally implemented watermarks on our AI
    products. We originally began with both image and watermarks
    using our SynthID technology. And we have recently expanded it
    to also be applied to text generated from our Gemini app and
    web experience and most recently, as part of our VO video tool.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay.
        Ms. Carlos. We have also taken the additional step to
    become a member of C2PA, the Coalition for Content Provenance
    and Authenticity. And there, we are serving as a steering
    member to work with the organization to create indicators and
    markings that will allow the content provenance that was
    created off platforms to additionally be recognized, and we are
    deploying those technologies across our platform.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you. We have mentioned the
    TAKE IT DOWN Act, and thank you for the support for that.
        Mr. Glazier, you talked about how this is the first Federal
    law related to generative AI and that it is a good first step.
    And could you talk about how if we don't move on from there and
    we just stop and don't do anything for years, which seems to be
    what has been going on, what is going to happen here and why it
    is so important to do this?
        Mr. Glazier. I think there is a very small window and an
    unusual window for Congress to get ahead of what is happening
    before it becomes irreparable. The TAKE IT DOWN Act was an
    incredible model. It was done for criminal activity, you know--
    --
        Senator Klobuchar. I know.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Glazier. Yes, right, you know. You wrote it.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Glazier. It was a great model, but it only goes so far.
    But we need to use that model now, and we need to expand it
    carefully in a balanced way to lots of other situations, which
    is exactly what the NO FAKES Act does.
        Senator Klobuchar. Right.
        Mr. Glazier. And I think, you know, we have a very limited
    amount of time in order to allow people and platforms to act
    before this gets to a point where it is so far out of the barn
    that instead of encouraging responsible AI development,
    instead, we allow investment and capital to go into----
        Senator Klobuchar. Into----
        Mr. Glazier [continuing]. AI development that hurts us.
        Senator Klobuchar [continuing]. Stealing things, yes.
        Mr. Glazier. So let's encourage investment the right way to
    boost great AI----
        Senator Klobuchar. Right.
        Mr. Glazier [continuing]. Development and be first. Let's
    not be the folks that encourage investment in AI technologies
    that really harm us.
        Senator Klobuchar. And Ms. Price, you have expressed
    concerns about this 10-year moratorium on State rules. I am
    very concerned, having spent years trying to pass some of these
    things, and I think that one of the ways we pass things
    quickly, like Mr. Glazier was talking about, is if people
    actually see a reason that they don't want to patchwork, they
    want to get it done. But if you just put a moratorium and you
    look at like the ELVIS law coming out of Tennessee, Ms.
    McBride, and some of the other things that would stop all of
    that. My last question here before we go to another round,
    could you talk about why you are concerned about what is right
    in front of us now, which is this 10-year moratorium?
        Ms. Price. Yes. Thank you for the question, Senator. We are
    concerned about the moratorium because it is basically
    signaling to the AI companies that they can kind of do whatever
    they want in the meantime, and it inhibits States' ability to
    adapt their laws to this form of technology that is changing
    very quickly and then has this potential to cause great harm.
        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you.
        Chair Blackburn. And I know Senator Coons is on his way and
    Senator Hawley is coming back, but Ms. Price, staying with you,
    you talked about the TAKE IT DOWN Act and the importance there,
    but touch on the gap that NO FAKES fills for a child who may
    have something posted, but yet it doesn't fit under TAKE IT
    DOWN and how this would open up an avenue of recourse for them.
        Ms. Price. Yes, thank you, Senator. So under the NO FAKES
    Act, because there is a private right of action, there would be
    another way essentially for a victim to seek accountability
    from a perpetrator or platform, which is really important
    because the layers of accountability are what really deter bad
    actors from engaging in harm. So having the criminal, but then
    also having the ability to do the private right of action, the
    civil action is important.
        Chair Blackburn. And speaking to the States and their
    actions, I do want to mention that Tennessee passed the ELVIS
    Act, which is like our first generation of the NO FAKES Act.
    And we certainly know that in Tennessee, we need those
    protections. And until we pass something that is federally
    preemptive, we can't call for a moratorium on those things,
    so----
        Senator Klobuchar. Excellent statement.
        Chair Blackburn. Of course.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Blackburn. Of course. Ms. Carlos, I want to talk with
    you for just a minute. And we are grateful for the support that
    you all have talked about. And there is a provision in the bill
    that I know is important to your platform and many others, and
    that's the notification piece and giving individuals harm. You
    have talked about artists being able to contact you, but for
    you all to be able to notify and letting people know about this
    and then asking for that content to come down and then taking
    that action.
        As we have worked on the Kids Online Safety Act, one of the
    complaints that had come to Senator Blumenthal and I from
    individuals that tried to get things off was they could not get
    a response. So this is something that that notification is an
    imperative. So talk a little bit about how you are approaching
    notification.
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Yes, so
    in looking at the framework of NO FAKES, again, we began with a
    voluntary framework on YouTube, which allows individuals to
    notify us when digital replica content of them is online. And
    this is smartly mirrored in the NO FAKES Act. It empowers a
    user to identify content and flag it to us when they believe it
    should be removed for an unauthorized use of their voice or
    likeness.
        And as you mentioned, that notification is critical because
    it signals to us the difference between content that is
    authorized and harmful fakes. And it is with that notice that
    we are able to review content and make an informed decision as
    to whether or not it should be removed.
        Chair Blackburn. And then what is your length of time for
    getting it down upon receiving notification? What is your
    process going to be on implementation?
        Ms. Carlos. Sure. So as a similar framework, we envision as
    under the DMCA where a web form would be easily available for
    any user quickly filled out and then submitted to our trust and
    safety team. We make every effort to review every notice on a
    case-by-case basis and remove it as soon as possible.
        Chair Blackburn. So are you talking hours, days? What is
    your framework?
        Ms. Carlos. I don't have the exact number on the top of my
    head, but I do know that we try to process every notification
    as quickly as possible.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you. If you will check on that----
        Ms. Carlos. Sure.
        Chair Blackburn [continuing]. And then get that information
    back to us, I think we would like to know that because the fact
    that this has taken such lengths of time for people to have any
    kind of response has been very difficult for consumers, and
    they feel like they are talking to the outer space and nobody
    is listening and nobody is responding.
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you for flagging the concern. I would be
    happy to followup with you and the Committee.
        Chair Blackburn. I appreciate that.
        Senator Coons, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Senator Coons. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
        I would like to first thank Ms. McBride for being here to
    testify in support of NO FAKES. Could you speak to why this
    bill is so important, both to protect artists like you and to
    protect your fans?
        Ms. McBride. Thank you. I think that it is important
    because, as artists, we hopefully want to speak the truth. We
    want to build a relationship with our fans in which they trust
    us so they believe what we say. So when you have something like
    a deepfake that either sells a product or says a statement, it
    can be so harmful to that trust. You know, I mean, I just
    realized sitting here that I bought a product, a collagen
    supplement off of Instagram the other day because it had LeAnn
    Rimes and a couple of other people, and I am sitting here
    thinking, oh my goodness, I don't even know if that was really
    them, right? So it is damaging to the artist and to the fan.
        You know, we had a situation personally where one of my
    fans believed they were talking to me, ended up selling their
    house and funneling the money to someone who they thought was
    me. That is so devastating to me to realize that somebody who
    trusts me could be duped like that, you know?
        And then also I think that eventually, somebody who is
    duped by a deepfake is going be angry enough to have
    retribution, which we are on stages in front of thousands of
    people. We are in public places. So it is a danger to the
    artist as well.
        Senator Coons. Mr. Glazier, to followup on Ms. McBride's
    testimony, what do you think are the consequences for the music
    industry if we don't get NO FAKES over the finish line? What
    will the consequences be for music fans and for the industry?
        Mr. Glazier. The entire music ecosystem is dependent on the
    authentic voice and the authentic image of the artist, right?
    That is what the music industry is. If you allow deepfakes to
    perpetuate, you are taking the soul out of the art. And when
    you do that, you are taking the humanity out of the art. And
    that is what art is.
        So I think it is fairly existential that the voice of music
    be the voice of music. I think that is what everything is built
    on. And the idea, it is almost bizarre that we have to sit here
    today talking about allowing someone to protect the use of
    themselves. If there is anything that we have a right in and
    should be able to control, it's the gifts that God gave us, the
    voices that we have, the image that we have. And for that to be
    taken from you is devastating both for the individual and
    obviously for the industry itself, which is built on these very
    voices.
        Senator Coons. Ms. Carlos, if I might, I just want to thank
    you for YouTube's partnership in getting to the place where you
    support NO FAKES. Other tech companies haven't come forward. I
    would be interested in what you might say or encourage me to
    say to the Metas or TikToks of the world about why they should
    support this bill, even though it imposes new obligations on
    them.
        And some have argued that NO FAKES might show legitimate
    speech by incentivizing platforms to over-remove content out of
    fear of being sued. How does YouTube think about balancing its
    obligations under this bill with its First Amendment
    obligations to users?
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you for the question, Senator. As we
    mentioned, YouTube largely supports this bill because we see
    the incredible opportunity of AI, but we also recognize those
    harms, and we believe that AI needs to be deployed responsibly.
        I believe Mr. Glazier mentioned during his opening
    statement that the NO FAKES Act does carry First Amendment
    exemptions: parody, satire, newsworthiness. And that is one of
    the reasons that we felt comfortable endorsing this bill. We
    are, at the end of the day, an open platform, and we believe
    that a variety of viewpoints can succeed on YouTube. So those
    would be some of the things that I would share with you to
    share with those other companies, but I cannot speak directly
    on behalf of why they may or may not choose to endorse the
    bill.
        Senator Coons. Understood. Thank you. And thank you all for
    your testimony today. Thank you.
        Chair Blackburn. Senator Hawley, you are recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Senator Hawley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thanks to
    all of the witnesses for being here.
        Ms. Carlos, if I could just start with you. You are here on
    behalf of YouTube, is that right?
        Ms. Carlos. That is correct.
        Senator Hawley. Can you tell me, why is it that YouTube has
    monetized videos that teach people how to generate pornographic
    deepfakes of women? Why does that happen on your platform?
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you for the question. Protecting our
    users is one of our top priorities. My general expertise is in
    music policy, so I am not in the best position to answer that
    question, but I am happy to followup with you.
        Senator Hawley. Do you know how many such videos there are
    out there that are--these are monetized videos now on YouTube.
        Ms. Carlos. I am not aware of that number. I can say that
    our community policies do not allow that type of content on our
    platform.
        Senator Hawley. Well, Forbes magazine just reported that
    YouTube has in fact promoted over 100 YouTube videos with
    millions of views that showcase AI deepfake porn and include
    tutorials on how to make deepfake porn, particularly porn that
    targets young women. Do you have any idea how much money
    YouTube has made off of this monetization?
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I
    do not have detail on this specific news article. I am happy to
    followup with you and the Committee.
        Senator Hawley. So you don't have any idea of how many ad
    dollars YouTube has made off of this?
        Ms. Carlos. I do not.
        Senator Hawley. Are you aware that one of these websites
    that was promoted by YouTube in these videos was later cited in
    a criminal prosecution for AI sexual abuse material--let me be
    more specific--generating AI sexual abuse material involving
    children?
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you again for the question, Senator. As
    we mentioned earlier, YouTube has endorsed the TAKE IT DOWN
    Act, and we take these issues very seriously. Again, I will
    notify that I represent music policy and do not have the
    information to give you a fulsome response during today's
    hearing.
        Senator Hawley. Well, so let me ask you this then. If a
    teenage girl's face ends up in an AI porn video on your
    platform, what does YouTube do about it? What is her recourse
    right now? What can she do to get some recompense, get some
    restitution?
        Ms. Carlos. After over a year ago, we updated our privacy
    policy so that anybody who believes that their voice or
    likeness is being used without their authorization on our
    platform can submit a request for removal.
        Senator Hawley. A request for removal. Is there some policy
    in getting reimbursement for any profits the company may have
    made, again, if these videos are monetized? I mean, does the
    victim get a share of anything?
        Ms. Carlos. I am not aware of those policies. I would have
    to followup with you, Senator.
        Senator Hawley. Why is it that the enforcement of YouTube's
    own policy here seems to only happen after videos go viral? Is
    there a reason for that?
        Ms. Carlos. I do not have the answer to that question to
    you.
        Senator Hawley. Do you know how many AI-generated deepfake
    videos or deepfake content is removed before a victim
    complains? Does the victim have to complain before YouTube does
    anything?
        Ms. Carlos. Again, my specialty is in music policy. I do
    understand that we use technology such as AI to search for that
    content. And when it is in violation of our policies, we will
    remove it.
        Senator Hawley. Let me ask you about this. YouTube training
    data, has YouTube provided data for use in Google's Gemini or
    other AI training programs?
        Ms. Carlos. YouTube does provide data in Google training
    data in accordance with our agreements.
        Senator Hawley. So if an artist uploads music to YouTube,
    does the company use that music to train AI models?
        Ms. Carlos. As I mentioned, we do share data in accordance
    with our agreements. I can't speak to the specifics of any
    individual agreement.
        Senator Hawley. Well, so how are people like Ms. McBride
    protected? I mean, so if you are an artist and you put any
    content on YouTube, does that mean that it is just free range?
    I mean, they can do whatever you want with it?
        Ms. Carlos. Again, it goes down to the terms of our
    agreement. I will say that we have forged deep partnerships
    with the music industry. We came out of the gate with forming
    AI music principles with the music industry and are continuing
    to experiment with them to see how AI can best benefit their
    creative process.
        Senator Hawley. So are there privacy protections? You are
    telling me YouTube has in place privacy protections for
    artists?
        Ms. Carlos. They apply to all individuals on our platform.
        Senator Hawley. Oh, so this is the click wrap scenario.
    This is in order to watch cute dog videos or whatever, you have
    got to click the ``I consent'' and that wraps in--you basically
    give consent for your stuff to be used?
        Ms. Carlos. There are all different types of various
    agreements, but our terms of service are included in that batch
    of agreements.
        Senator Hawley. I guess my question is, where are users
    told about their privacy protections if they have any, and
    where do they explicitly consent?
        Ms. Carlos. They agree to our terms of service, and we also
    have our privacy policy available on the web.
        Senator Hawley. Okay. So that is the click wrap. So in
    other words, if you come onto YouTube, you want to use it, you
    click, you got to click through. So you click it, and there,
    you basically agreed to allow YouTube to give your content to
    AI and allow them to train it without any further consent. Is
    that basically it?
        Ms. Carlos. Again, we implement our policies in terms of
    our agreement are what govern what goes into our training.
        Senator Hawley. Well, and I am asking you the content of
    that agreement. So in other words, if I am an artist and I
    upload something to YouTube and yes, sure, I have clicked the
    button that says, yes, I want to be able to use YouTube, are
    you telling me that I don't have any further recourse? If
    YouTube then goes and gives the information to AI models and
    systems, there is nothing further I can do, or am I missing
    something?
        Ms. Carlos. If it is in accordance with our agreements, we
    will share that data.
        Senator Hawley. Yes, that seems like a big problem to me.
    That seems like a huge, huge problem to me. And the fact that
    YouTube is monetizing these kinds of videos seems like a huge,
    huge problem to me.
        I am glad you are here today. I wish there were more tech
    companies here today, but we have got to do more. I mean,
    YouTube, I am sure, is making billions of dollars off of this.
    The people who are losing are the artists and the creators and
    the teenagers whose lives are upended. We got to give
    individuals powerful enforceable rights in their images, in
    their property, in their lives back again, or this is just
    never going to stop.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you. And that is the reason we have
    the NO FAKES bill, and we are trying to push it across the
    finish line.
        I would like to offer a second round. Senator Klobuchar, do
    you have additional questions?
        Senator Klobuchar. Very, very short. I know that Senator
    Coons has asked some of my questions about just people's
    personal experience with this. I guess I would ask you, Mr.
    Glazier, I am not sure you were asked about this. Do you agree
    that using copyrighted materials to create copycat content
    undermines the value of the music created by artists and could
    chill creation of new art?
        Mr. Glazier. Absolutely. You know, if you are able to copy
    copyrighted material for any purpose without consent, you are
    basically allowing the person who is copying to make the money
    and to do with it what they want, but not the creator who is
    supposed to actually control it and who made it to be
    compensated for it and to control its exploitation. It is the
    very opposite of what the Constitution calls for in creating
    intellectual property.
        Senator Klobuchar. Very good. One last question.
        Chair Blackburn. Sure, go ahead.
        Senator Klobuchar. This is the last one on the consumer
    education issue that was raised. Thank you. I am sure you all
    care about it, but Mr. Brookman, so while we should not place
    the burden solely on consumers to protect themselves from AI
    scams, I don't think that is going to work very well. What
    steps should Congress take to help educate consumers when it
    comes to AI literacy and the like? I think it is something we
    could have some agreement on.
        Mr. Brookman. Yes, I think spending the money for a public
    awareness campaign is, I think, a really good idea. I think
    people, you know, hear stories of friends of friends who it has
    happened to, but a lot of people just have no idea that the
    things they see online, the things they see on Facebook are
    just not real. So in addition to laws----
        Senator Klobuchar. You know one that says I am the fourth
    richest woman in the world now?
        Mr. Brookman. Oh, congratulations.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Klobuchar. Yes, that is just this week. I am sorry.
    I don't want to exaggerate. America.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Klobuchar. And then people try to defend me by
    sending out the list of the top 10 richest with like Oprah, and
    I always think it is kind of sad that I am nowhere near it. But
    yes, that is the latest thing that is out there.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Klobuchar. Go on, Mr. Brookman.
        Mr. Brookman. Yes, training people to be aware of it, to
    think about it, just to, you know, watch out for social
    engineering attacks, false, you know, calls for urgency. You
    know, the deepfake voice right now is usually good for a little
    while, but it is getting better, right, and it is going to
    continue to get better. So one idea is, you know, having a
    family safe word, right, a word that only you and your family
    know that the scammer can't get. But like they have access to a
    lot of personal data about us, so we are all vulnerable. The
    numbers are going up dramatically, so just like teaching
    people. Like I said, it is a shame we have to teach people to
    do this, but it is the world we live in.
        Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you.
        Thank you, Senator Blackburn.
        Chair Blackburn. Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Ms. Price, I was glad to see President Trump
    sign the TAKE IT DOWN Act earlier this week. Why is NO FAKES
    still necessary if TAKE IT DOWN is on the books?
        Ms. Price. Thank you, Senator. No fakes is still necessary
    because it provides a way for victims to bring a civil lawsuit
    on their own behalf, and so there is an importance to having,
    yes, on the one hand, the criminal piece, the criminal law
    accountability and the required take down under the FTC, but
    then, of course, the victims being able to bring their own
    lawsuit if they wish to do that. It is more effective for
    deterrence to have multiple things.
        Senator Coons. Ms. Carlos, why did YouTube come to the
    table? You could have just made it a whole lot harder for the
    bill to move forward if you didn't make concessions and agree
    to be a part of advocating for the bill.
        Ms. Carlos. Thank you for the question and thank you for
    including us in that round of stakeholders. So YouTube sits in
    a very unique kind of universe. You know, we not only have our
    users and music partners and media partners, but we also have
    creators. And that is one area where this idea of digital
    replicas can cause real world harm. So in addition to
    supporting NO FAKES, which gives them the individual right to
    remove content, not just from YouTube, but from other
    platforms, we are continuing to invest in new technology, which
    we refer to as likeness ID, which will allow our participating
    members and our pilot to have their face and voice scanned and
    will be able to match across our platform. So we are continuing
    to invest in this technology as we see it is a top issue.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator
    Blackburn, Ranking Member Klobuchar.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you, Senator Coons.
        Mr. Glazier, I want you to touch on contracts. We have had
    quite a discussion this week on copyright.
        And as artists negotiate these contracts for their name,
    their image, their likeness, recently SAG-AFTRA made a move in
    some of their negotiations on this. But talk a little bit about
    the importance of having a federal standard as it relates to
    standard contract law.
        Mr. Glazier. Yes, this goes to the very essence of consent
    for the artist. And so not only does the NO FAKES Act give
    control and consent to the individual about the use of their
    voice and the use of their likeness, it also imposes some
    guardrails around the length of those contracts, what those
    contracts mean when the person is alive, what that means after
    the person passes. And it also has special provisions that
    protect minors who might enter into contracts that includes
    parents and guardians and also court authority.
        So it does a very good job of preventing abuse while giving
    the power to the individual whose voice is at stake and whose
    image is at stake in being able to license it.
        Chair Blackburn. Thank you so much.
        Ms. Price, I want you to submit to us--you can do this in
    writing. When we look at the physical world and the statutes
    that exist for protecting individuals from some of the harms
    that you have listed today and the importance of TAKE IT DOWN
    and the importance of NO FAKES, but we don't have all of those
    criminal statutes that transfer to the virtual space. And I
    would like for you to give me a summary of your thoughts on
    that. Your testimony is expansive and helpful. And as I said,
    we have submitted that whole testimony.
        Mr. Brookman, we have submitted your entire testimony also,
    and we thank you for that.
        But I would like to have just a little bit more from you on
    that issue of those protections. We have talked about NO FAKES
    and the COPIED Act and KOSA. We talk often about this
    difference, and you touched on it, and I would like to have
    something more expansive.
        With that, we have no further Members present and no
    further questions. I will remind you all that Members have 5
    days to submit questions for the record, and then you are going
    to have 10 days to return those answers to us.
        I thank you all. Our witnesses have been wonderful today.
    We appreciate your testimony for the record.
        And with that, the hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:52 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]

                                A P P E N D I X

    The following submissions are available at:

      https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-119shrg61677/pdf/CHRG-
        119shrg
        61677-add1.pdf

    Submitted by Chair Klobuchar:

     Digital Media Association (DIMA), the voice of music
      streaming, statement............................................     2

                                     [all]