Tag: think of the children

KOSA Reintroduced: Child “Safety” Bill Raises Alarms Over Internet Surveillance, Digital ID, and Free Speech Risks

Senators have once again put forward the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), reviving a bill that, if enacted, would radically reshape how Americans experience the internet.

Promoted as a measure to protect children, this latest version now carries the backing of Apple, a tech giant that has publicly endorsed the legislation as a meaningful step toward improving online safety.

But behind the bipartisan sales pitch and industry support lies a framework that risks expanding government control over online content and eroding user privacy through mandated age verification and surveillance infrastructure.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

KOSA is often described as a child protection bill, requiring platforms to limit exposure to content that could contribute to mental health issues such as depression or disordered eating.

What is less emphasized by its sponsors is how the bill empowers the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and sue platforms over speech that’s deemed “harmful” to minors.

Though lawmakers insist the bill does not authorize the censorship of content, it effectively places government pressure on websites to sanitize what users see, or face liability. Such chilling effects rarely need explicit censorship orders to shape outcomes.

Keep reading

EU nations seek mandatory social media age checks

France, Spain, and Greece are advocating for mandatory age verification on social media platforms such as Meta’s Facebook and Elon Musk’s X, Bloomberg reported on Friday.

The proposed rules would require all internet-connected devices to be equipped with age verification technology. Digital services ministers from the three EU member states are coordinating the initiative ahead of a meeting with their counterparts from the bloc on June 6, a document cited by Bloomberg said.

The three nations reportedly argue that the “lack of proper and widespread age-verification mechanisms” makes it difficult to effectively enforce age limits. They aim to leverage the economic power of the EU’s 450 million consumers to compel tech companies to implement robust verification systems, according to the report.

French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed on Tuesday his support for mandatory age verification for teenagers registering on social media platforms, stating that online networks have contributed to suffering and mental health issues among young people.

“We must protect our children,” he told TF1, adding that age verification on social networks should be imposed.

According to Bloomberg, the European Commission, along with several bloc members, is already developing pilot projects to boost parental controls and age verification. However, their efforts are being hindered by regulatory differences across EU countries and the ease with which users can access social networks from outside the bloc.

Keep reading

Florida Rejects Controversial Encryption Backdoor Bill

Legislators in the US state of Florida have shot down a bid to introduce a law that would have mandated encryption backdoors.

The outcome of the effort – known as SB 868: Social Media Use by Minors – means that the backdoors would have allowed encryption to be weakened in this fundamental way affecting all platforms where minors might choose to open an account.

As the fear-mongering campaign against encryption is being reiterated over and over again, it’s worth repeating – there is no known way of undermining encryption for any one category of users, without leaving the entire internet open and at the mercy of anything from government spies, to plain criminals.

And that affects both people’s communications and transactions.

Not to mention that while framing such radical proposals as needed for a declaratively equally large goal to achieve – the safety of youth online – in reality, by shuttering encryption, young people and everyone else are negatively affected.

If anything, it would make everyone online less secure, and, by nature of the world –  young people more so than others.

And so, Florida’s Senate on announced that SB 868 is now “indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration.”

The idea behind the proposal was to allow law enforcement access to communications on a social platform – by forcing a company to build in backdoors any time law enforcement came up either with a warrant – or merely a subpoena.

Keep reading

New GOP Bill Seeks To Take Sledgehammer To Online Porn Industry

Congressional Republicans will introduce legislation Thursday that would severely crack down on internet pornography and potentially deal a major blow to the online porn industry.

Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee and Republican Illinois Rep. Mary Miller’s Interstate Obscenity Definition Act would create a national definition of obscenity under the Communications Act of 1934 and amend the Supreme Court’s 1973 “Miller Test” for determining what qualifies as obscene, according to background on the bill exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. The bill would pave the way for the prosecution of obscene content disseminated across state lines or from foreign countries and open the door to federal restrictions or bans regarding online porn.

“Obscenity isn’t protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children,” Lee told the DCNF. “Our bill updates the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age so this content can be taken down and its peddlers prosecuted.”

Lee and Miller have been leading advocates in Congress to take on internet pornography at the federal level and protect children from exposure to online porn.

The lawmakers’ bill would make obscenity easier to prosecute by altering the three-pronged approach known as the Miller Test from the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. California, according to the background on the bill. The Miller Test determined content to be obscene if it appeals to “prurient interests,” describes sexual conduct “in a patently obscene way” and lacks “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”

Lee and Miller are seeking to update that definition in part by changing the second prong about portraying sexual conduct “in a patently offensive way … specifically defined by the applicable state law.” Instead, their bill would determine content to be obscene if it depicts or describes “actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate or gratify the sexual desires of a person.”

Lee has justified the legislation in part by arguing that the Supreme Court’s “Miller Test” is no longer applicable in an era where porn is primarily viewed online and easy for children to access.

Keep reading

Florida’s New Social Media Bill Says the Quiet Part Out Loud and Demands an Encryption Backdoor

At least Florida’s SB 868/HB 743, “Social Media Use By Minors” bill isn’t beating around the bush when it states that it would require “social media platforms to provide a mechanism to decrypt end-to-end encryption when law enforcement obtains a subpoena.” Usually these sorts of sweeping mandates are hidden behind smoke and mirrors, but this time it’s out in the open: Florida wants a backdoor into any end-to-end encrypted social media platforms that allow accounts for minors. This would likely lead to companies not offering end-to-end encryption to minors at all, making them less safe online.

Encryption is the best tool we have to protect our communication online. It’s just as important for young people as it is for everyone else, and the idea that Florida can “protect” minors by making them less safe is dangerous and dumb.

The bill is not only privacy-invasive, it’s also asking for the impossible. As breaches like Salt Typhoon demonstrate, you cannot provide a backdoor for just the “good guys,” and you certainly cannot do so for just a subset of users under a specific age. After all, minors are likely speaking to their parents and other family members and friends, and they deserve the same sorts of privacy for those conversations as anyone else. Whether social media companies provide “a mechanism to decrypt end-to-end encryption” or choose not to provide end-to-end encryption to minors at all, there’s no way that doesn’t harm the privacy of everyone.

If this all sounds familiar, that’s because we saw a similar attempt from an Attorney General in Nevada last year. Then, like now, the reasoning is that law enforcement needs access to these messages during criminal investigations. But this doesn’t hold true in practice.

In our amicus brief in Nevada, we point out that there are solid arguments that “content oblivious” investigation methods—like user reporting— are “considered more useful than monitoring the contents of users’ communications when it comes to detecting nearly every kind of online abuse.” That remains just as true in Florida today.

Law enforcement can and does already conduct plenty of investigations involving encrypted messages, and even with end-to-end encryption, law enforcement can potentially access the contents of most messages on the sender or receiver’s devices, particularly when they have access to the physical device. The bill also includes measures prohibiting minors from accessing any sort of ephemeral messaging features, like view once options or disappearing messages. But even with those features, users can still report messages or save them. Targeting specific features does nothing to protect the security of minors, but it would potentially harm the privacy of everyone.

Keep reading

Court blocks California law on children’s online safety

A federal judge said California cannot enforce a state law meant to shield children from online content that could harm them mentally or physically.

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled on Thursday that the trade group NetChoice deserved a preliminary injunction because it was likely to show the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act violated its members’ free speech rights under the Constitution’s First Amendment.

NetChoice said the law would turn its 39 members including Amazon.com (AMZN.O), Google (GOOGL.O), Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms (META.O), Netflix (NFLX.O) and Elon Musk’s X into state-deputized censors, and “censor the internet under the guise of privacy.”

The office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta, which defended the law, did not immediately respond on Friday to requests for comment.

Ambika Kumar, a lawyer for NetChoice, called the law “a breathtaking act of unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, content-based censorship. We are pleased to see it enjoined.”

Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2022, California’s law required businesses to create reports addressing whether their online platforms could harm children, and take steps before launch to reduce the risks.

It also required businesses to estimate ages of child users and configure privacy settings for them, or provide high settings for everyone. Civil fines could reach $2,500 per child for negligence and $7,500 per child for intentional violations.

Keep reading

Virginia GOP Governor Claims Legalizing Marijuana Sales Would Harm Children And Increase Crime

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) emphasized during his State of the Commonwealth address that he’s not interested in cooperating with lawmakers to legalize marijuana sales in the state, claiming that doing so would hurt children, worsen mental health and increase violent crime.

“Strong communities work to prevent harmful drug use,” the governor said during the speech on Monday.

Use, possession and limited cultivation of cannabis by adults are already legal in Virginia, the result of a Democrat-led proposal approved by lawmakers in 2021. But Republicans, after winning control of the House and governor’s office later that year, subsequently blocked the required reenactment of a regulatory framework for retail sales. Since then, illicit stores have sprung up to meet consumer demand.

Supporters of regulating commercial sales in the state say the move would not create a cannabis market in Virginia but instead regulate the state’s existing illicit market, which some estimates value at nearly $3 billion. But Youngkin has rejected the idea, issuing a veto of a legal sales measure passed by lawmakers after Democrats retook control of the legislature last year.

“Everyone knows where I stand on establishing a retail marijuana market,” Youngkin said in his speech. “Let’s work together on other issues where we can find common ground.”

Keep reading

New York Democrat Files Bills To Restrict THC Potency In Marijuana And Ban Consumption Within 30 Feet Of Children

A New York Democrat has introduced a pair of bills that would put new restrictions on marijuana in the state. One measure would limit the THC potency of cannabis products, while the other would prohibit cannabis consumption within 30 feet of where any child lives.

Both bills, A977 and A1007, were filed on Wednesday by Assemblymember Phil Steck. The potency proposal would limit marijuana flower to no more than 15 percent delta-9 THC, while all other cannabis products—including concentrates and hemp-derived products—would be capped at 25 percent delta-9 THC.

Growing, processing or distributing products exceeding those limits would be a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The consumption measure, meanwhile, would outlaw smoking or vaping cannabis “within thirty feet of a child or within thirty feet of any location in which children reside or attend for any recreational or educational purpose.”

The restriction would include “areas separated by walls, closed door or floors within a building,” meaning the change could theoretically limit cannabis consumption even within users’ private residences if their neighbors have kids.

In addition to that provision, the consumption bill would also step up penalties for second and subsequent offenses around unlawful marijuana use, such as consuming near schools or using in areas where smoking or vaping is otherwise prohibited. Currently those activities are civil violations that carry a fine of up to $25 or community service. Under Steck’s bill, that would still be true for the first offense, but subsequent offenses would be charged as Class B misdemeanors.

A legislative memo in support of tighter consumption restrictions says that research has “shown that second-hand smoke from vaping and smoking cannabis are proven to be harmful to the health of adults and children.”

“Most adults have to ability to remove themselves from the area, children may not have the same ability,” the memo says. “This bill requires adults maintain a safe distance from children when smoking or vaping cannabis.”

As for Steck’s proposed THC limit, the memo in support of that proposal says that “the most egregious omission in legalizing adult-use cannabis in New York State is the absence of any cap on its potency.”

“Most people can use cannabis safely,” it says, but with increased availability of higher THC concentrations, there have been more adverse drug reactions.”

The memo also says that in particular, “edibles are trouble,” citing a study out of Colorado that found that edibles accounted for less than 1 percent of statewide cannabis sales but were responsible for 11 percent of emergency room visits.

“With an eye towards public health and safety,” it adds, “this legislation imposes a 15 percent cap on any cannabis flower, and a 25 percent cap on the concentration of the active ingredient delta-9 tetrahydrocannibinol in all manufactured cannabis products in the state.”

Notably, the bill would not adjust the total allowable THC limits in state-legal cannabis edibles, and the percentage-based limits would likely do little to rein in potency of the products. Even at the proposed 25 percent THC limit, a gummy weighing just 2 grams could contain up to half a gram of THC—a massive dose for most consumers.

The advocacy group NORML quickly came out against the new potency bill, A977, calling its proposed limits “arbitrary” in an email to supporters on Thursday.

Keep reading

Five Eyes Urges Broader Censorship Under “Protect the Children” Campaign

A network facilitating spy agencies’ intelligence-sharing between the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, known as Five Eyes, has its sights set on encryption, and proceeding from that, also online anonymity.

Even more online censorship would also not be a bad idea – these are some of the highlights from the first public-facing paper the organizations behind this group have published.

We obtained a copy of the paper for you here.

And Five Eyes is not above promoting its ultimate and much more far-reaching goals by using the good old “think of the children” – the paper’s title is, Young People and Violent Extremism: A Call for Collective Action.

Both it and an accompanying press release choose to consider online encryption as merely a tool used by criminals. At the same time, the paper is ignoring the fact that the entire internet ecosystem, from communications to banking and everything in between, requires strong encryption both for privacy, and security.

But, Five Eyes focuses only on communications, which they vaguely refer to as online environments, and ones that can allow sex offenders access to children, they also mention extremists, and equally vaguely, “other” malign actors.

Keep reading

X’s Linda Yaccarino Backs Kids’ “Safety” Bill as Digital ID Privacy Fears Grow

As the legislative session nears its conclusion, X CEO Linda Yaccarino has announced her role in revising the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), a move seemingly intended to sway hesitant Republican leaders in the House. But skeptics warn that the bill’s approach to protecting children online—through measures likely to lead to age verification—could come at the cost of privacy and online anonymity, leading to the broader adoption of digital ID systems.

Under KOSA, tech platforms would face a “duty of care” to prevent harm to minors, targeting features like infinite scroll and photo filters. While Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) lauded the updates for “safeguarding free speech online and ensuring it is not used to stifle expression,” privacy advocates argue the bill’s underlying mechanisms remain problematic. They warn that fulfilling KOSA’s requirements could necessitate platforms to verify users’ ages, potentially by tying online activity to government-issued IDs—a move that threatens to erode online anonymity and jeopardize free expression.

While the bill itself does not mandate age verification, it requires a “duty of care” towards content shown to minors that could cause platforms to introduce age verification to avoid liability. Despite the updated text of the bill, it still contains a controversial provision that will likely ultimately pave the way for online age verification (by requiring the Secretary of Commerce, FTC, and FCC to study “options for developing systems to verify age at the device or operating system level”).

X owner Elon Musk has recently criticized Australia for trying to implement a similar bill so it’s unclear why Musk and Yaccarino aren’t aligned on the issue.

Keep reading