Trinity (talk | contribs)
m Added archived reference links
Line 27: Line 27:
Since the UK Online Safety Act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other,<ref name=":2" /> it has a broad impact across the entire internet for those accessing websites from within the UK. All online services that Ofcom deems to be within the scope of the Online Safety Act must incorporate an identity verification process to determine each user's age.<ref name=":3" /> This has forced many websites to geo-block the UK because they are too small to justify or afford implementing their own the identity verification process or partnering with a third provider. A list of affected websites is available on [https://OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk].  
Since the UK Online Safety Act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other,<ref name=":2" /> it has a broad impact across the entire internet for those accessing websites from within the UK. All online services that Ofcom deems to be within the scope of the Online Safety Act must incorporate an identity verification process to determine each user's age.<ref name=":3" /> This has forced many websites to geo-block the UK because they are too small to justify or afford implementing their own the identity verification process or partnering with a third provider. A list of affected websites is available on [https://OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk].  


The broad range of the act has caused content from breaking news,<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=Koopman |first=Saskia |date=August 13, 2025 |title=Why the Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/ |website=City AM  |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref> war footages,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Maiberg |first=Emanuel |date=July 29, 2025 |title=UK Users Need to Post Selfie or Photo ID to View Reddit's r/IsraelCrimes, r/UkraineWarFootage |url=https://www.404media.co/uk-users-need-to-post-selfie-or-photo-id-to-view-reddits-r-israelcrimes-r-ukrainewarfootage/ |website=404 Media  |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref> and political videos<ref name=":6" /> to be heavily suppressed and labelled "harmful".
The broad range of the act has caused content from breaking news,<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=Koopman |first=Saskia |date=August 13, 2025 |title=Why the Online Safety Act has become a political nightmare |url=https://www.cityam.com/why-labours-online-safety-act-has-become-a-political-nightmare/ |website=City AM  |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref> war footages,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Maiberg |first=Emanuel |date=July 29, 2025 |title=UK Users Need to Post Selfie or Photo ID to View Reddit's r/IsraelCrimes, r/UkraineWarFootage |url=https://www.404media.co/uk-users-need-to-post-selfie-or-photo-id-to-view-reddits-r-israelcrimes-r-ukrainewarfootage/ |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Z4Etm |archive-date=29 Jul 2025 |access-date=August 25, 2025 |website=404 Media}}</ref> and political videos<ref name=":6" /> to be heavily suppressed and labelled "harmful".


===Spotify===
===Spotify===
Line 34: Line 34:
===YouTube===
===YouTube===
{{Main|Youtubes Requirement for Government ID}}
{{Main|Youtubes Requirement for Government ID}}
On 30 July 2025, [[YouTube]] responded by announcing its verification system, requesting users for either a government-issued ID, a photo, or credit card, in order to show that users are 18 and older. Age will be estimated through various information, including videos watched, and would lock users flagged below 18 unless they send one of aforementioned proofs.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ingram |first=Michael |date=30 Jul 2025 |title=YouTube is Rolling Out A New Controversial Feature |url=https://gamerant.com/youtube-new-age-verification-feature-id-recognition/ |url-status=live |access-date=14 Aug 2025 |website=GameRant}}</ref>
On 30 July 2025, [[YouTube]] responded by announcing its verification system, requesting users for either a government-issued ID, a photo, or credit card, in order to show that users are 18 and older. Age will be estimated through various information, including videos watched, and would lock users flagged below 18 unless they send one of aforementioned proofs.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ingram |first=Michael |date=30 Jul 2025 |title=YouTube is Rolling Out A New Controversial Feature |url=https://gamerant.com/youtube-new-age-verification-feature-id-recognition/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/hIm29 |archive-date=31 Jul 2025 |access-date=14 Aug 2025 |website=GameRant}}</ref>


===Wikipedia===
===Wikipedia===
The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), which owns the digital encyclopedia platform [[Wikipedia]], sued the United Kingdom to prevent them from forcing age checks on their websites. The WMF made a statement that being forced to comply with this act would compromise the privacy of its editors and the neutrality of the encyclopedia. On 11 August 2025, the London High Court denied the WMF's reasoning, but didn't necessarily force age checks for the website.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Castro |first=Chiara |date=August 12, 2025 |title=Case dismissed – Wikipedia loses UK Online Safety Act legal challenge, but it may still be safe from age checks |url=https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/case-dismissed-wikipedia-loses-uk-online-safety-act-legal-challenge-but-it-may-still-be-safe-from-age-checks}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=11 August 2025 |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>
The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), which owns the digital encyclopedia platform [[Wikipedia]], sued the United Kingdom to prevent them from forcing age checks on their websites. The WMF made a statement that being forced to comply with this act would compromise the privacy of its editors and the neutrality of the encyclopedia. On 11 August 2025, the London High Court denied the WMF's reasoning, but didn't necessarily force age checks for the website.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Castro |first=Chiara |date=August 12, 2025 |title=Case dismissed – Wikipedia loses UK Online Safety Act legal challenge, but it may still be safe from age checks |url=https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/case-dismissed-wikipedia-loses-uk-online-safety-act-legal-challenge-but-it-may-still-be-safe-from-age-checks |archive-url=https://archive.ph/8ZynX |archive-date=16 Aug 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=11 August 2025 |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/ |archive-url=https://archive.ph/0hKM1 |archive-date=11 Jan 2026}}</ref>


===4Chan===
===4Chan===
Line 52: Line 52:
Attorneys Preston Byrne and Ron Coleman, acting for 4chan, responded publicly to Ofcom’s provisional notice, which accuses the American company of failing to meet information notice requirements and possibly breaching duties related to content moderation.
Attorneys Preston Byrne and Ron Coleman, acting for 4chan, responded publicly to Ofcom’s provisional notice, which accuses the American company of failing to meet information notice requirements and possibly breaching duties related to content moderation.


The attorneys described the UK’s actions as an “illegal campaign of harassment” targeting American tech firms and warned that this extraterritorial enforcement of censorship law was incompatible with the First Amendment.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Harper |first=Cindy |date=2025-08-18 |title=4chan Lawyers Fire Back as UK Tries to Censor from Across the Pond |url=https://reclaimthenet.org/us-lawyers-defend-4chan-against-uk-online-safety-act-enforcement |access-date=2025-08-18 |work=Reclaim the Net}}</ref>
The attorneys described the UK’s actions as an “illegal campaign of harassment” targeting American tech firms and warned that this extraterritorial enforcement of censorship law was incompatible with the First Amendment.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Harper |first=Cindy |date=2025-08-18 |title=4chan Lawyers Fire Back as UK Tries to Censor from Across the Pond |url=https://reclaimthenet.org/us-lawyers-defend-4chan-against-uk-online-safety-act-enforcement |archive-url=https://archive.ph/z424o |archive-date=18 Aug 2025 |access-date=2025-08-18 |work=Reclaim the Net}}</ref>


Since enforcement began, the UK’s media regulator Ofcom has reportedly sent formal notices to several US tech companies, instructing them to comply or face penalties. These letters have ignited backlash among American lawmakers, many of whom argue that Britain has crossed a line by trying to dictate speech rules to American businesses and citizens. House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, along with other members of Congress, has taken his concerns directly to British ministers, raising objections with Science Secretary Peter Kyle.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Frieth |first=Dan |date=2025-07-31 |title=The White House Puts UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Notice Over UK’s Dangerous Online Censorship Laws |url=https://reclaimthenet.org/us-uk-clash-over-online-safety-act-free-speech |access-date=2025-08-18 |work=Reclaim the Internet}}</ref>
Since enforcement began, the UK’s media regulator Ofcom has reportedly sent formal notices to several US tech companies, instructing them to comply or face penalties. These letters have ignited backlash among American lawmakers, many of whom argue that Britain has crossed a line by trying to dictate speech rules to American businesses and citizens. House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, along with other members of Congress, has taken his concerns directly to British ministers, raising objections with Science Secretary Peter Kyle.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Frieth |first=Dan |date=2025-07-31 |title=The White House Puts UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Notice Over UK’s Dangerous Online Censorship Laws |url=https://reclaimthenet.org/us-uk-clash-over-online-safety-act-free-speech |archive-url=https://archive.ph/hqjkG |archive-date=31 Jul 2025 |access-date=2025-08-18 |work=Reclaim the Internet}}</ref>


==Data breaches including ID documents==
==Data breaches including ID documents==
Line 60: Line 60:


===Discord Third-Party Customer Service (5CA)===
===Discord Third-Party Customer Service (5CA)===
On 3 October 2025, [[Discord]] issued a press release announcing "a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service [5CA]", in which "The unauthorized party [...] gained access to a small number of government‑ID images (e.g., driver’s license, passport) from users who had appealed an age determination".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-10-03 |title=Update on a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service |url=https://discord.com/press-releases/update-on-security-incident-involving-third-party-customer-service |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251006163040/https://discord.com/press-releases/update-on-security-incident-involving-third-party-customer-service |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2025-10-07 |website=discord.com}}</ref> The total number of ID images exposed was approximately 70,000. The data accessed came from an age-related appeals process which has been in place since before the OSA came into effect, and is used in conjunction with an "Automatic Age Check" system using k-ID.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-12-19 |title=Help! I'm old enough to use Discord in my country but I got locked out? |url=https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360041820932-Help-I-m-old-enough-to-use-Discord-in-my-country-but-I-got-locked-out |url-status=live |access-date=2025-10-13 |website=Discord}}</ref>
On 3 October 2025, [[Discord]] issued a press release announcing "a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service [5CA]", in which "The unauthorized party [...] gained access to a small number of government‑ID images (e.g., driver’s license, passport) from users who had appealed an age determination".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-10-03 |title=Update on a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service |url=https://discord.com/press-releases/update-on-security-incident-involving-third-party-customer-service |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251006163040/https://discord.com/press-releases/update-on-security-incident-involving-third-party-customer-service |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2025-10-07 |website=discord.com}}</ref> The total number of ID images exposed was approximately 70,000. The data accessed came from an age-related appeals process which has been in place since before the OSA came into effect, and is used in conjunction with an "Automatic Age Check" system using k-ID.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-12-19 |title=Help! I'm old enough to use Discord in my country but I got locked out? |url=https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360041820932-Help-I-m-old-enough-to-use-Discord-in-my-country-but-I-got-locked-out |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250127212200/https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360041820932-Help-I-m-old-enough-to-use-Discord-in-my-country-but-I-got-locked-out |archive-date=27 Jan 2025 |access-date=2025-10-13 |website=Discord}}</ref>


==Consumer response==
==Consumer response==
Line 87: Line 87:
Ofcom discouraged the promotion of VPNs.<ref name="UK_VPN" />
Ofcom discouraged the promotion of VPNs.<ref name="UK_VPN" />


UK Parliament considers all petitions that get more than 100,000 signatures for debate. On 28 July 2025, when the petition to repeal the act had about 400,000 signatures, the government responded with this message: "The Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.", only a few days after coming into force.<ref name=":0" /> This was only after three days (25 July 2025) the "highly effective age assurance" requirement came into force.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Department for Science, Innovation and Technology |date=2025-07-24 |title=Collection: Online Safety Act |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/online-safety-act |website=Gov.UK}}</ref>
UK Parliament considers all petitions that get more than 100,000 signatures for debate. On 28 July 2025, when the petition to repeal the act had about 400,000 signatures, the government responded with this message: "The Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.", only a few days after coming into force.<ref name=":0" /> This was only after three days (25 July 2025) the "highly effective age assurance" requirement came into force.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Department for Science, Innovation and Technology |date=2025-07-24 |title=Collection: Online Safety Act |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/online-safety-act |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250724092803/https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/online-safety-act |archive-date=24 Jul 2025 |website=Gov.UK}}</ref>


The technology minister Peter Kyle said on Good Morning Britain, "if you want to overturn the Online Safety Act you are on the side of predators. Not those who want to keep children safe".<ref>{{Cite news |date=2025-07-29 |title=Peter Kyle Says 'Nigel Farage Is on the Side of Predators' |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-MaeOLISlA |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Good Morning Britain, Youtube}}</ref>
The technology minister Peter Kyle said on Good Morning Britain, "if you want to overturn the Online Safety Act you are on the side of predators. Not those who want to keep children safe".<ref>{{Cite news |date=2025-07-29 |title=Peter Kyle Says 'Nigel Farage Is on the Side of Predators' |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-MaeOLISlA |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Good Morning Britain, Youtube}}</ref>
Line 98: Line 98:
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]


== External links ==
==External links==
* https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/roadmap-to-regulation
*https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/roadmap-to-regulation


==References==
==References==