European Online Safety Act: Difference between revisions

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 2:

== Overview ==

The UK Online Safety Act 2023 is an act passed by the United Kingdom Parliament that gives the government of the United Kingdom to suppress and record online content that the United Kingdom government deems harmful to children. The UK government cite states that as of March 2025, platforms are now required to use age assuring technology to prevent underage users from being exposed to adult content such as pornography, hateful content, or content which encourages suicide, self harm, or eating disorders<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Online Safety Act |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/online-safety-act |url-status=live |website=gov.uk}}</ref>. In practice the act is likely to affect both children and adults.

(This is re-edition of the contents displayed in [https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ fightchatcontrol.eu])

European Online Safety Act is a stark affront to fundamental human rights, particularly the inviolable right to privacy. It mandates sweeping surveillance measures—including automated scanning of every private message and file—without any suspicion or consent, eroding encryption safeguards and sowing the seeds of Orwellian mass monitoring. This legislation weaponizes the veneer of safety to justify an authoritarian intrusion into personal digital spaces—an erosion of privacy dressed up as protection.

== How it works ==

==How it works==

=== 1. UK Online Safety Act (OSA) ===

===1. UK Online Safety Act (OSA)===

* '''Age Verification Enforcement:''' The OSA ~~obliges~~ online platforms to require age verification for users attempting to access specific types of content. Frequently, the verification process is outsourced to third-party companies. These companies may request sensitive personal and biometric information—including facial scans, identity documents, and financial data.

*'''Age Verification Enforcement:''' The OSA Requires online platforms to require age verification for users attempting to access specific types of content. Frequently, the verification process is outsourced to third-party companies. These companies may request sensitive personal and biometric information—including facial scans, identity documents, and financial data.

* '''Privacy Risks:''' The absence of a public registry or certification standard for age verification providers means there is significant potential for misuse or mishandling of user data. Many providers operate overseas with limited regulation and weak data protection practices, creating major privacy vulnerabilities.

*'''Privacy Risks:''' The absence of a public registry or certification standard for age verification providers means there is significant potential for misuse or mishandling of user data. Many providers operate overseas with limited regulation and weak data protection practices, creating major privacy vulnerabilities.

* '''Impact on Users:''' ~~Millions in the UK~~ have had to provide private details ~~simply~~ to use social media platforms or dating apps~~. This widespread data collection is criticized by privacy advocates~~.

*'''Impact on Users:''' U.K Citizens have had to provide private details where they previously didn't to use social media platforms or dating apps.

* '''Surveillance and Content Moderation:''' The ~~Act~~ expands monitoring ~~and surveillance~~, requiring platforms to scan ~~end-to-end~~ encrypted messages for illegal content. ~~Experts highlight that~~ these requirements could technically compromise privacy and security.

*'''Surveillance and Content Moderation:''' The OSA expands monitoring of users of various social media platforms, requiring platforms to scan encrypted messages for illegal content. these requirements could technically compromise privacy and security.

* '''Free Expression:''' Stringent moderation and age-gating may restrict information access for all users (including adults who refuse to submit sensitive data). These measures risk ~~fostering~~ self-censorship and suppressing open debate, even affecting democratic participation.

*'''Free Expression:''' Stringent moderation and age-gating may restrict information access for all users (including adults who refuse to submit sensitive data). These measures risk self-censorship and suppressing open debate, even affecting democratic participation when the act obliges "democratically important" content to not be removed.

=== 2. EU Digital Services Act (DSA) ===

===2. EU Digital Services Act (DSA)===

* '''Child Safety Provisions:''' The DSA requires platforms serving minors to implement robust, privacy-focused safeguards—like age verification or estimation. The European Commission recommends “safety and privacy by design,” but these are guidelines rather than strict rules.

*'''Child Safety Provisions:''' The DSA requires platforms serving minors to implement robust, privacy-focused safeguards—like age verification or estimation. The European Commission recommends “safety and privacy by design,” but these are guidelines rather than strict rules.

* '''Decentralized Enforcement:''' Responsibility for implementing these safeguards lies with national regulators, resulting in potentially inconsistent application across EU countries.

*'''Decentralized Enforcement:''' Responsibility for implementing these safeguards lies with national regulators, resulting in potentially inconsistent application across EU countries.

* '''Content Removal and Censorship:''' The Act defines "illegal content" broadly, including violations of any EU or national laws—even future legislation. Platforms must remove such content or face penalties, including fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue.

*'''Content Removal and Censorship:''' The Act defines "illegal content" broadly, including violations of any EU or national laws—even future legislation. Platforms must remove such content or face penalties, including fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue.

* '''Cross-Border Effects:''' The strictest national speech laws in the EU can set the censorship standard for the entire bloc, impacting all European users.

*'''Cross-Border Effects:''' The strictest national speech laws in the EU can set the censorship standard for the entire bloc, impacting all European users.

* '''Practical Examples:''' Actual cases, such as the prosecution of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, show how national regulations can be invoked to suppress legitimate political or religious speech across borders.

*'''Practical Examples:''' Actual cases, such as the prosecution of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, show how national regulations can be invoked to suppress legitimate political or religious speech across borders.

== Why it is a problem ==

==Why it is a problem==

==== '''Mass Surveillance''' ====

===='''Mass Surveillance'''====

Every private message, photo, and file scanned automatically: no suspicion required, no exceptions*, even encrypted communications.<blockquote>*EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not. Demand fairness.</blockquote>

==== '''Breaking Encryption''' ====

===='''Breaking Encryption'''====

Weakening or breaking end-to-end encryption exposes everyone’s communications—including sensitive financial, medical, and private data—to hackers, criminals, and hostile actors.

==== Fundamental Rights ====

====Fundamental Rights====

Undermines your fundamental rights to privacy and data protection, as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter—rights considered core to European democratic values.

==== False Positives ====

====False Positives====

Automated scanners routinely misidentify innocent content, such as vacation photos or private jokes, as illegal, putting ordinary people at risk of false accusations and damaging investigations.

==== Ineffective Child Protection ====

====Ineffective Child Protection====

Child protection experts and organizations, including the UN, warn that mass surveillance fails to prevent abuse and actually makes children less safe—by weakening security for everyone and diverting resources from proven protective measures.

==== Global Precedent ====

====Global Precedent====

Creates a dangerous global precedent enabling authoritarian governments, citing EU policy, to roll out intrusive surveillance at home, undermining privacy and free expression worldwide.

== Examples & Problems ==

==Examples & Problems==

Numerous grassroots movements, digital rights organizations, and news outlets across Europe are actively opposing Online Safety laws such as the UK's Online Safety Act (OSA) and the EU's proposed Chat Control regulation. Their main concerns include mass surveillance, loss of online anonymity, undermining of encryption, heightened risk of identity theft, and chilling of free speech online.

=== Key Campaigns & Movements ===

===Key Campaigns & Movements===

===== '''Fightchatcontrol.EU''' =====

====='''Fightchatcontrol.EU'''=====

A leading citizen-driven campaign against the EU's "Chat Control" legislation, Fightchatcontrol.eu <ref>{{Cite web |title=Fight Chat Control: About |url=https://fightchatcontrol.eu/about}}</ref> tracks Member States' stances, shares news, provides tools to email EU representatives, and highlights privacy dangers—including mass scanning of all private digital communications (even encrypted ones) and the threat to fundamental rights under the EU Charter . The platform explicitly states its mission is to protect privacy and digital security and empower individuals to oppose these laws. The movement is widely referenced in online communities, such as ''/r/ireland,'' for its clear mapping of EU member positions and practical activism risks <ref>{{Cite web |title=A Danish programmer built a website to highlight every single EU members stance on the new mass surveillance tool Chat Control 2.0 and its implications for you as a citizen in the European Union |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/1mnkecx/a_danish_programmer_built_a_website_to_highlight/}}</ref>.

Line 59:

Line 60:

Lastly, The Wikimedia Foundation (operator of Wikipedia) challenged aspects of the Online Safety Act in UK courts <ref>{{Cite web |title=Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations |url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2025/08/11/wikimedia-foundation-challenges-uk-online-safety-act-regulations/}}</ref>, warning that it forces platforms to violate their own privacy commitments and risks eroding internet freedom. Although their recent challenge failed <ref>{{Cite news |title=Wikipedia loses challenge to UK Online Safety Act |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/wikipedia-loses-challenge-to-uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref>, it highlights deep dissent among global online communities, .

=== Prominent Articles and Reports ===

===Prominent Articles and Reports===

==== '''Aardwolf Security: Privacy Nightmare <ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=UK Age Verification: The Online Safety Act’s Privacy Nightmare |url=https://aardwolfsecurity.com/uk-age-verification-the-online-safety-acts-privacy-nightmare/}}</ref>''' ====

===='''Aardwolf Security: Privacy Nightmare <ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=UK Age Verification: The Online Safety Act’s Privacy Nightmare |url=https://aardwolfsecurity.com/uk-age-verification-the-online-safety-acts-privacy-nightmare/}}</ref>'''====

Details how age verification under the UK’s OSA requires millions of adults to share facial scans or ID documents with third-party firms. Experts warn this creates massive biometric and ID databases vulnerable to hacks, calling them “honeypots for cybercriminals,” and stating that breached biometric data can never truly be changed, exposing people to lifelong privacy.

Line 74:

Line 75:

Reuters and other news outlets highlight the risk to free speech, with platforms like X warning about indiscriminate censorship and loss of safe online spaces.

=== Core Privacy Problems and Loss of Online Anonymity ===

===Core Privacy Problems and Loss of Online Anonymity===

* Compulsory use of government IDs, biometrics, and facial recognition destroys basic online anonymity—users are permanently linked to every activity, risking exposure and discrimination <ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />.

*Compulsory use of government IDs, biometrics, and facial recognition destroys basic online anonymity—users are permanently linked to every activity, risking exposure and discrimination <ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />.

* Centralizing sensitive data creates irresistible targets for hacking and identity theft. Unlike passwords, breached biometric data cannot be “reset” <ref>{{Cite news |title=Why Labour’s Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/}}</ref>.

*Centralizing sensitive data creates irresistible targets for hacking and identity theft. Unlike passwords, breached biometric data cannot be “reset” <ref>{{Cite news |title=Why Labour’s Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/}}</ref>.

* Laws treat encrypted messaging as subject to backdoor scanning or “client-side” surveillance, undermining technical privacy even globally <ref>{{Cite web |title=Safety Should Not Cost People Their Privacy |url=https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Digital Explainer – The Online Safety Act 2023: what is online harm? |url=https://www.keystonelaw.com/keynotes/the-online-safety-act-2023-what-is-online-harm}}</ref>.

*Laws treat encrypted messaging as subject to backdoor scanning or “client-side” surveillance, undermining technical privacy even globally <ref>{{Cite web |title=Safety Should Not Cost People Their Privacy |url=https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Digital Explainer – The Online Safety Act 2023: what is online harm? |url=https://www.keystonelaw.com/keynotes/the-online-safety-act-2023-what-is-online-harm}}</ref>.

* Age-gating and content moderation force many smaller sites to shut down and chill participation in support, activist, and political communities, especially those depending on anonymity for safety <ref name=":2" />

*Age-gating and content moderation force many smaller sites to shut down and chill participation in support, activist, and political communities, especially those depending on anonymity for safety <ref name=":2" />

=== Free Speech and Internet Values ===

===Free Speech and Internet Values===

By restricting anonymous communication, the Act undermines foundational principles of the internet: free speech, open debate, and the right to dissent without fear of retaliation <ref name=":3" /><ref name=":0" />. Ambiguous definitions of “harmful” content, coupled with automated scanning systems, risk fostering over-censorship and generating false accusations that can silence legitimate expression and political activism <ref name=":4">{{Cite web |title=Fight Chat Control |url=https://fightchatcontrol.eu/}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship |url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/}}</ref>. The move toward large-scale surveillance not only threatens civil liberties within Europe but also sets a troubling global precedent, with EU and UK regulations potentially inspiring authoritarian regimes to adopt similar measures that curtail free speech worldwide <ref name=":4" />.

== Useful sites ==

==Useful sites==

* https://noyb.eu/en/projects

*https://noyb.eu/en/projects

* https://edri.org/

*https://edri.org/

== References ==

==References==

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 {{ToneWarning}}
+== Overview ==
+The UK Online Safety Act 2023 is an act passed by the United Kingdom Parliament that gives the government of the United Kingdom to suppress and record online content that the United Kingdom government deems harmful to children. The UK government cite states that as of March 2025, platforms are now required to use age assuring technology to prevent underage users from being exposed to adult content such as pornography, hateful content, or content which encourages suicide, self harm, or eating disorders<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-24 |title=Online Safety Act |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/online-safety-act |url-status=live |website=gov.uk}}</ref>. In practice the act is likely to affect both children and adults.
   (This is re-edition of the contents displayed in [https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ fightchatcontrol.eu])
-European Online Safety Act is a stark affront to fundamental human rights, particularly the inviolable right to privacy. It mandates sweeping surveillance measures—including automated scanning of every private message and file—without any suspicion or consent, eroding encryption safeguards and sowing the seeds of Orwellian mass monitoring. This legislation weaponizes the veneer of safety to justify an authoritarian intrusion into personal digital spaces—an erosion of privacy dressed up as protection.
-== How it works ==
+==How it works==
-=== <u>1. UK Online Safety Act (OSA)</u> ===
+===<u>1. UK Online Safety Act (OSA)</u>===
-* '''Age Verification Enforcement:''' The OSA obliges online platforms to require age verification for users attempting to access specific types of content. Frequently, the verification process is outsourced to third-party companies. These companies may request sensitive personal and biometric information—including facial scans, identity documents, and financial data.
+*'''Age Verification Enforcement:''' The OSA Requires online platforms to require age verification for users attempting to access specific types of content. Frequently, the verification process is outsourced to third-party companies. These companies may request sensitive personal and biometric information—including facial scans, identity documents, and financial data.
-* '''Privacy Risks:''' The absence of a public registry or certification standard for age verification providers means there is significant potential for misuse or mishandling of user data. Many providers operate overseas with limited regulation and weak data protection practices, creating major privacy vulnerabilities.
+*'''Privacy Risks:''' The absence of a public registry or certification standard for age verification providers means there is significant potential for misuse or mishandling of user data. Many providers operate overseas with limited regulation and weak data protection practices, creating major privacy vulnerabilities.
-* '''Impact on Users:''' Millions in the UK have had to provide private details simply to use social media platforms or dating apps. This widespread data collection is criticized by privacy advocates.
+*'''Impact on Users:''' U.K Citizens have had to provide private details where they previously didn't to use social media platforms or dating apps.
-* '''Surveillance and Content Moderation:''' The Act expands monitoring and surveillance, requiring platforms to scan end-to-end encrypted messages for illegal content. Experts highlight that these requirements could technically compromise privacy and security.
+*'''Surveillance and Content Moderation:''' The OSA expands monitoring of users of various social media platforms, requiring platforms to scan encrypted messages for illegal content. these requirements could technically compromise privacy and security.
-* '''Free Expression:''' Stringent moderation and age-gating may restrict information access for all users (including adults who refuse to submit sensitive data). These measures risk fostering self-censorship and suppressing open debate, even affecting democratic participation.
+*'''Free Expression:''' Stringent moderation and age-gating may restrict information access for all users (including adults who refuse to submit sensitive data). These measures risk self-censorship and suppressing open debate, even affecting democratic participation when the act obliges "democratically important" content to not be removed.
-=== <u>2. EU Digital Services Act (DSA)</u> ===
+===<u>2. EU Digital Services Act (DSA)</u>===
-* '''Child Safety Provisions:''' The DSA requires platforms serving minors to implement robust, privacy-focused safeguards—like age verification or estimation. The European Commission recommends “safety and privacy by design,” but these are guidelines rather than strict rules.
+*'''Child Safety Provisions:''' The DSA requires platforms serving minors to implement robust, privacy-focused safeguards—like age verification or estimation. The European Commission recommends “safety and privacy by design,” but these are guidelines rather than strict rules.
-* '''Decentralized Enforcement:''' Responsibility for implementing these safeguards lies with national regulators, resulting in potentially inconsistent application across EU countries.
+*'''Decentralized Enforcement:''' Responsibility for implementing these safeguards lies with national regulators, resulting in potentially inconsistent application across EU countries.
-* '''Content Removal and Censorship:''' The Act defines "illegal content" broadly, including violations of any EU or national laws—even future legislation. Platforms must remove such content or face penalties, including fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue.
+*'''Content Removal and Censorship:''' The Act defines "illegal content" broadly, including violations of any EU or national laws—even future legislation. Platforms must remove such content or face penalties, including fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue.
-* '''Cross-Border Effects:''' The strictest national speech laws in the EU can set the censorship standard for the entire bloc, impacting all European users.
+*'''Cross-Border Effects:''' The strictest national speech laws in the EU can set the censorship standard for the entire bloc, impacting all European users.
-* '''Practical Examples:''' Actual cases, such as the prosecution of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, show how national regulations can be invoked to suppress legitimate political or religious speech across borders.
+*'''Practical Examples:''' Actual cases, such as the prosecution of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, show how national regulations can be invoked to suppress legitimate political or religious speech across borders.
-== Why it is a problem ==
+==Why it is a problem==
-==== '''Mass Surveillance''' ====
+===='''Mass Surveillance'''====
 Every private message, photo, and file scanned automatically: no suspicion required, no exceptions*, even encrypted communications.<blockquote><small>*EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules.  They get privacy.  You and your family do not. Demand fairness.</small></blockquote>
-==== '''Breaking Encryption''' ====
+===='''Breaking Encryption'''====
 Weakening or breaking end-to-end encryption exposes everyone’s communications—including sensitive financial, medical, and private data—to hackers, criminals, and hostile actors.
-==== Fundamental Rights ====
+====Fundamental Rights====
 Undermines your fundamental rights to privacy and data protection, as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter—rights considered core to European democratic values.
-==== False Positives ====
+====False Positives====
 Automated scanners routinely misidentify innocent content, such as vacation photos or private jokes, as illegal, putting ordinary people at risk of false accusations and damaging investigations.
-==== Ineffective Child Protection ====
+====Ineffective Child Protection====
 Child protection experts and organizations, including the UN, warn that mass surveillance fails to prevent abuse and actually makes children less safe—by weakening security for everyone and diverting resources from proven protective measures.
-==== Global Precedent ====
+====Global Precedent====
 Creates a dangerous global precedent enabling authoritarian governments, citing EU policy, to roll out intrusive surveillance at home, undermining privacy and free expression worldwide.
-== Examples & Problems ==
+==Examples & Problems==
 Numerous grassroots movements, digital rights organizations, and news outlets across Europe are actively opposing Online Safety laws such as the UK's Online Safety Act (OSA) and the EU's proposed Chat Control regulation. Their main concerns include mass surveillance, loss of online anonymity, undermining of encryption, heightened risk of identity theft, and chilling of free speech online.
-=== <u>Key Campaigns & Movements</u> ===
+===<u>Key Campaigns & Movements</u>===
-===== '''Fightchatcontrol.EU''' =====
+====='''Fightchatcontrol.EU'''=====
 A leading citizen-driven campaign against the EU's "Chat Control" legislation, Fightchatcontrol.eu <ref>{{Cite web |title=Fight Chat Control: About |url=https://fightchatcontrol.eu/about}}</ref> tracks Member States' stances, shares news, provides tools to email EU representatives, and highlights privacy dangers—including mass scanning of all private digital communications (even encrypted ones) and the threat to fundamental rights under the EU Charter . The platform explicitly states its mission is to protect privacy and digital security and empower individuals to oppose these laws. The movement is widely referenced in online communities, such as ''/r/ireland,'' for its clear mapping of EU member positions and practical activism risks <ref>{{Cite web |title=A Danish programmer built a website to highlight every single EU members stance on the new mass surveillance tool Chat Control 2.0 and its implications for you as a citizen in the European Union |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/1mnkecx/a_danish_programmer_built_a_website_to_highlight/}}</ref>.
@@ Line 59: / Line 60: @@
 Lastly, The Wikimedia Foundation (operator of Wikipedia) challenged aspects of the Online Safety Act in UK courts  <ref>{{Cite web |title=Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations |url=https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2025/08/11/wikimedia-foundation-challenges-uk-online-safety-act-regulations/}}</ref>, warning that it forces platforms to violate their own privacy commitments and risks eroding internet freedom. Although their recent challenge failed <ref>{{Cite news |title=Wikipedia loses challenge to UK Online Safety Act |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/wikipedia-loses-challenge-to-uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref>, it highlights deep dissent among global online communities, .
-=== <u>Prominent Articles and Reports</u> ===
+===<u>Prominent Articles and Reports</u>===
-==== '''Aardwolf Security: Privacy Nightmare <ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=UK Age Verification: The Online Safety Act’s Privacy Nightmare |url=https://aardwolfsecurity.com/uk-age-verification-the-online-safety-acts-privacy-nightmare/}}</ref>''' ====
+===='''Aardwolf Security: Privacy Nightmare <ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=UK Age Verification: The Online Safety Act’s Privacy Nightmare |url=https://aardwolfsecurity.com/uk-age-verification-the-online-safety-acts-privacy-nightmare/}}</ref>'''====
 Details how age verification under the UK’s OSA requires millions of adults to share facial scans or ID documents with third-party firms. Experts warn this creates massive biometric and ID databases vulnerable to hacks, calling them “honeypots for cybercriminals,” and stating that breached biometric data can never truly be changed, exposing people to lifelong privacy.
@@ Line 74: / Line 75: @@
 Reuters and other news outlets highlight the risk to free speech, with platforms like X warning about indiscriminate censorship and loss of safe online spaces.
-=== <u>Core Privacy Problems and Loss of Online Anonymity</u> ===
+===<u>Core Privacy Problems and Loss of Online Anonymity</u>===
-* Compulsory use of government IDs, biometrics, and facial recognition destroys basic online anonymity—users are permanently linked to every activity, risking exposure and discrimination <ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />.
+*Compulsory use of government IDs, biometrics, and facial recognition destroys basic online anonymity—users are permanently linked to every activity, risking exposure and discrimination <ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />.
-* Centralizing sensitive data creates irresistible targets for hacking and identity theft. Unlike passwords, breached biometric data cannot be “reset” <ref>{{Cite news |title=Why Labour’s Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/}}</ref>.
+*Centralizing sensitive data creates irresistible targets for hacking and identity theft. Unlike passwords, breached biometric data cannot be “reset” <ref>{{Cite news |title=Why Labour’s Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/}}</ref>.
-* Laws treat encrypted messaging as subject to backdoor scanning or “client-side” surveillance, undermining technical privacy even globally <ref>{{Cite web |title=Safety Should Not Cost People Their Privacy |url=https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Digital Explainer – The Online Safety Act 2023: what is online harm? |url=https://www.keystonelaw.com/keynotes/the-online-safety-act-2023-what-is-online-harm}}</ref>.
+*Laws treat encrypted messaging as subject to backdoor scanning or “client-side” surveillance, undermining technical privacy even globally <ref>{{Cite web |title=Safety Should Not Cost People Their Privacy |url=https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Digital Explainer – The Online Safety Act 2023: what is online harm? |url=https://www.keystonelaw.com/keynotes/the-online-safety-act-2023-what-is-online-harm}}</ref>.
-* Age-gating and content moderation force many smaller sites to shut down and chill participation in support, activist, and political communities, especially those depending on anonymity for safety <ref name=":2" />
+*Age-gating and content moderation force many smaller sites to shut down and chill participation in support, activist, and political communities, especially those depending on anonymity for safety <ref name=":2" />
-=== <u>Free Speech and Internet Values</u> ===
+===<u>Free Speech and Internet Values</u>===
 By restricting anonymous communication, the Act undermines foundational principles of the internet: free speech, open debate, and the right to dissent without fear of retaliation <ref name=":3" /><ref name=":0" />. Ambiguous definitions of “harmful” content, coupled with automated scanning systems, risk fostering over-censorship and generating false accusations that can silence legitimate expression and political activism <ref name=":4">{{Cite web |title=Fight Chat Control |url=https://fightchatcontrol.eu/}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship |url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/}}</ref>. The move toward large-scale surveillance not only threatens civil liberties within Europe but also sets a troubling global precedent, with EU and UK regulations potentially inspiring authoritarian regimes to adopt similar measures that curtail free speech worldwide <ref name=":4" />.
-== Useful sites ==
+==Useful sites==
-* https://noyb.eu/en/projects
+*https://noyb.eu/en/projects
-* https://edri.org/
+*https://edri.org/
-== References ==
+==References==
 <references />