Quebec introduced Bill 73 in October 2024 to create a fast court process for stopping the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. The legislation later became law, giving judges powers to order removal, destruction and de-indexing while imposing serious penalties for disobeying an order.
The remedy was designed for speed
A person could use a simplified form online or at a courthouse and ask the Court of Québec for urgent relief. Justice Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette said applications should be decided within hours or days because every additional circulation can increase harm.
That civil process supplemented, rather than replaced, police reporting and the Criminal Code offence of distributing an intimate image without consent.
Orders could reach several points of distribution
A judge could direct a person controlling an image to stop sharing it, destroy it or take other steps. The law also allowed an order aimed at de-indexing a hyperlink so search systems would be less likely to lead users to the material.
No removal tool can guarantee that every copy disappears once a file has spread. Rapid action still limits discoverability and makes continued distribution legally riskier.
The definition covered altered material
The law defined an intimate image broadly enough to include a visual or audio recording, live transmission and altered content that represents or appears to represent a person in an intimate context where privacy was reasonably expected.
That wording addressed synthetic and manipulated sexual material, including convincing deepfakes, rather than requiring a victim to prove that the depicted event literally occurred.
Young people could apply directly
A person aged 14 or older could submit an application or authorize someone else to act. If the depicted person had died, a close relative could seek an order.
Accessible filing matters because teenagers are often targeted through relationship abuse, coercion or school-based circulation. Privacy, plain language and support remain necessary so the legal process does not create another barrier.
Non-compliance carried escalating penalties
A person who ignored an order could face fines from $5,000 to $50,000 for each day of non-compliance, with higher exposure for a repeat offence, and potentially up to 18 months in jail.
Those sanctions applied through legal procedures; they were not automatic punishment based on an accusation. Notice, evidence and the opportunity to respond remain part of due process.
Web platforms still have responsibilities
The law could address links and people with control over content, including material uploaded to pornography sites without valid consent. Platforms need reporting tools that preserve evidence, prevent re-upload and respond quickly to authenticated orders.
Automated moderation alone can fail to recognize context or identity. Human escalation and safeguards against malicious takedown requests are also required.
The bill became an enforceable statute
The National Assembly adopted Bill 73 as chapter 37 of Quebec’s 2024 statutes. Its core rapid-removal process came into force in June 2025, turning the proposal described in the original article into an available remedy.
Implementation should be judged by processing time, compliance, repeat distribution and whether victims can obtain help without prohibitive legal cost.
Consent remains specific and revocable
Agreeing to create or privately send an image is not consent for public posting, forwarding or sale. A past relationship does not create an enduring right to distribute intimate material.
Quebec’s law recognized that the harm expands faster than a conventional lawsuit can move. Its strongest contribution was practical: an urgent route to contain circulation, backed by enforceable orders, while criminal investigation and any claim for damages could proceed on their own legal tracks.
