This week, when users in Utah of pornhub have tried to enter the online porn platform, they have come across a video in which they reported that the page was not available. The crash, however, is not due to a technical glitch. It is a protest of the company for the law that has entered into force this Wednesday in the state and that imposes on companies that offer online pornography and “other material harmful to minors & rdquor; obligations and responsibilities, stricter than up to now, for Check that users are over 18 years of age.
The norm follows the model of another initiative that since January 1 has been applied in Louisianawhere he verification requirement age is imposed on all pages where at least 33.3% of the content is pornographic. And it is just one of the laws that have seen the light of day in the United States at a time of impulse both at level state as federal of legislative initiatives To try to protect minors both in Internet as in networks social.
Initiatives in Congress
This impulse has gained strength after the revelations and studies on the negative impact of websites and apps on minors. So far, it has borne more fruit at the state level, where there are already six that have approved regulations and another 21 that are debating them. Also in the Congresshowever, they are under debate at least five proposals, including three that have been introduced or retouched this week. They include one that would prohibit opening accounts on social networks to under 13 years of age, other than directly I would ban TikTok in the US and a third that, to combat the distribution of images of child exploitation, could weaken and criminalize encryption.
In Utah and Arkansas, laws that go past age verification, given that impose on social networks that minors obtain the consent of parents or guardians to open accounts. The Utah law, which will begin to apply on March 1 of next year, also requires apps to block access to minors from 10:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. unless the setting is changed by an adult; prevents strangers from sending messages, and prohibits ads from being displayed and the collection or use of personal user information. In one of his most controversial points, he also gives adults access to the content of minors’ accounts.
Alliances and controversies
In all cases, the standards have bipartisan support, unusual these days of polarization in the US, and have the support of various associations and groups that work with minors and parents. They also face, however, opposition and rejection and not only the one that could be expected from the sector technological.
More than a hundred civil rights groups and some politicians are blowing up the alarms before a legislation that, they warn, jeopardizes freedoms and rights, technologies such as encryption and vulnerable communities. Progressive groups are especially concerned about the unintended consequences that the legislation can have at a time when the American right stands mired in culture wars. Since Joe Biden’s arrival at the White House, they have intensified the crusade that targets the LGTBQ community, reproductive rights or history racial.
“More damage than solutions & rdquor;
“Many of the proposed solutions end up causing more damage than the problems they fix& rdquor ;, he assures in a telephone interview jain samirVice President of Policy Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), which states, for example, that “age verification creates concern about privacy& rdquor ;, since it will force the providers to provide information and, in addition, “it may affect the right of expression or to access information anonymously & rdquor;.
With respect to adult consent required or their access to the accounts of minors, the expert recalls that the model can work between parents and children who get along well. “However, we know that there are relationships that are not good”, he says. One can think, for example, of a young LGTBQ who does not have family support or a young woman who needs access to information on reproductive health or abortion and is afraid of what her parents may say. “These initiatives can have a negative impact on rights of privacy and free expression& rdquor ;, especially of adolescents, warns Jain.
culture wars
These are concerns shared in the virtual press conference, focused on federal legislation, that representatives of civil rights and technology groups have organized this week. In it, the Democratic Senator Ron Wyden warned that the laws raised in the Chambers “they will weaken the encryption, which threatens the privacy and security of all law-abiding Americans.”
Wyden also noted with concern the political moment in which this legislative impulse is produced. Democratic California has a law more focused on requirements for technology companies, but the majority are from conservative states and focus on “parental rights & rdquor ;.
extremist governors
“Give to extremist governors the power to decide what content is safe for children is not an option. Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott (Governors of Florida and Texas) are using all their power to persecute queer and trans children, censor reproductive health information and erase the basic history about race in the US & rdquor ;, denounced the senator. “And I share the goal of making the internet safe for kids and limiting addictive elements, but I urge my colleagues to focus on elements that protect minors instead of giving more and more power to mega-Republicans to wage a culture war against children & rdquor ;.
Evan Greer, director of the Fight for the Future organization, warned at the same event of “the abominable alliance between well-meaning legislators who want to protect children and others who have pushed over 400 anti-LGBT laws across the country and want to control online speech and restrict free expression for marginalized communities.”
Greer maintains that legislators and regulators “certainly” should prosecute abusive practices regulate aspects such as surveillance advertising that feeds business models that harm minors. “But we need to get it right -added-. Many of these laws are based on the idea that we protect children by isolating them from discussions of important issues such as eating disorders, mental health or substance abuse, but we know from data and evidence that they are safer when they can discuss these issues with their peers and with experts.
Other problems
Beyond that, Samir Jain, from Center for Democracy and Technology, points in other undesirable directions. According to them “online services can feel pressured to remove content, including legall, for fear that authorities such as attorneys general feel that it is not in the best interest of the child & rdquor ;. In addition, it maintains Differences in legislation between states “make us question its effectiveness & rdquor;. In Utah, for example, the law that went into effect this week has triggered the use of vpnvirtual private networks that hide location and thus manage to evade age verification requirements.
Related news