RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina state legislature this week ratified a bill that would impose new regulations that industry observers have warned could push adult websites and platforms to ban most adult creators and content.
As XBIZ reported when the bill was introduced in April, HB 805, titled the “Prevent Sexual Exploitation of Women and Minors Act,” includes a requirement to verify performers’ ages and consent via a process that would significantly exceed federal record-keeping requirements under Section 2257. It would mandate explicit written consent for each individual sexual act in which a performer engaged during the creation of the content, as well as separate consent for distribution of the content.
Further, anyone appearing in adult content would be entitled to withdraw their consent at any time, regardless of any legal contract they might have signed. The site or platform would then be required to remove the content.
“At the request of a performer, a pornographic image distributed or published by an online entity operator must be removed within 72 hours of the request being made, regardless of the age or consent of the performer,” the bill reads.
This provision would constitute a content-based invalidation of legal contracts not seen in any other industry or sector.
Requests to remove content could be submitted by anyone, not just persons appearing in the content. Each request claiming that age or consent verification was not properly obtained would trigger a mandatory review process.
However, the proposed law would also require sites to remove content “if any question arises” as to the consent of a performer. Since receiving a request claiming that age or consent verification was not properly obtained would appear to constitute a “question” arising, this provision could effectively put adult sites and platforms at the mercy of anyone seeking to force the site to remove content by barraging them with requests.
Violators would be subject to civil penalties. The original draft also imposed criminal penalties, but that provision was removed via the amendment process in the legislature. So was a provision requiring performer consent to be expressed using a form specifically created or approved by North Carolina’s attorney general.
Industry advocates and stakeholders have warned that if passed into law, this legislation could create havoc in the adult industry by requiring an inaccessible level of documentation for previously published content and by effectively invalidating model contracts.
The bill also fails to include any appeal provision for wrongfully removed material, which according to industry attorney Lawrence Walters could incentivize abuse of the takedown procedure by bad actors.
“The end result will likely be self-censorship of adult content by platforms to avoid the risks of substantial fines,” Walters told XBIZ when the bill was filed. “Similar results occurred when FOSTA/SESTA was passed in 2018.”
Free Speech Coalition Director of Public Policy Mike Stabile added that the bill would severely limit marketing and require platforms to build and maintain massive databases of creators’ IDs and legal documents — regulations he called “so burdensome that they could push sites to ban most adult creators and content, and could decimate creators’ ability to build an audience or interact with fans.”
Tacked-On Anti-Trans Provisions Could Spark Veto
The bill is on its way to the desk of North Carolina’s governor, Josh Stein. Stein is a Democrat, but anti-porn laws in other states have found backing among members of both parties.
The situation became more complicated, however, when legislators added provisions unrelated to the adult industry. Those include sections targeting transgender rights and enabling parents to block school libraries from lending their children books of which they do not approve.
While Stein has not yet indicated whether he plans to sign the bill, he did recently proclaim June 2025 as LGBTQ+ Pride Month in North Carolina, a move not in line with right-wing lawmakers targeting "gender ideology."
Should Stein veto the bill, the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature could attempt to override the veto.
