The California legislature is very, very close to passing AB 2273, The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act. As far as I can tell, it has strong support in the legislature and very little opposition. And that's incredibly dangerous, because the
bill is not just extremely problematic, but at the same time it's also impossible to comply with. The bill is a for the children bill in that it has lots of language in there claiming that this is about protecting children from
nefarious online services that create harm. But, as Goldman makes clear, the bill targets everyone, not just children, because it has ridiculously broad definitions. Bill 2273 doesn't limit its impact to sites targeting those
under 13. It targets any business with an online service likely to be accessed by children who are defined by a consumer or consumers who are under 18 years of age. I'm curious if that means someone who is not buying (i.e., consuming) anything doesn't
count? Most likely it will mean consuming as in accessing / using the service. And that's ridiculous. Because EVERY service is likely to have at least someone under the age of 18 visit it. According to the
law, I need to estimate the age of child users with a reasonable level of certainty. How? Am I really going to have to start age verifying every visitor to the site? It seems like I risk serious liability in not doing so. And then what? Now California
has just created a fucking privacy nightmare for me. I don't want to find out how old all of you are and then track that data. We try to collect as little data about all of you as possible, but under the law that puts me at risk. Yes, incredibly, a bill that claims to be about protecting data, effectively demands that I collect way more personal data than I ever want to collect.
See full article from techdirt.com
|