Very interesting comments, thank you all for pointing the contradicting evidence. I was not aware that my understanding was controversial. Apparently the mass

Very interesting comments, thank you all for pointing the contradicting evidence. I was not aware that my understanding was controversial. Apparently the mass of evidence that can be easily found, including Wikipedia and the TechDirt article linked, suggest that I was wrong in my understanding. I do not remember from what source my understanding is from, but I remember it appeared to come from a semi-respectable source at the time. The Tech Dirt article is at least implying that certain politicians are lying about that law. If we look at the article about the 5th Circuit ruling, it appears that implication is that the judges are misunderstanding the law as well. I certainly don't think politicians are above lies. But I think large tech companies have very large vested interest here as well, including Wikipedia and Google. I don't think these companies are above misrepresenting the facts either. It appears that the opinion I presented above is commonplace. It also appears that some of the sponsors(?) of the law and judges that have looked into this issue have opinion of the law that differs from the Tech Dirt article. Also, it appears impossible to find the source where I read it from. These suggests to me that there is some controversy. Perhaps, in an ironic twist, the source is censored from Google results. In any case, my profession has taught me to look more carefully when there is a large disagreement about the facts. Apparently I need to go to the primary sources and read the law next.