It's S. 678, and it would exclude communications over the Internet from the legal definition of "public communications" -- i.e., that which gets regulated.

People here have disagreed as to whether it's the best approach to the issue -- (a), whether it goes far enough in protecting speech rights, and (b) whether it opens too many avenues for coordinated speech which should be disfavored.  (I.e., a 527/PAC could totally coordinate with a campaign as to what its website should say, whereas it couldn't with its tv ads.)

Its language has also been incorporated by Republicans into a 527 "reform" bill, about which I wrote here.