Age assurance legislation drives talk on how to create an age-aware internet

There are few hotter topics in biometrics and regulatory circles right now than the issue of age assurance as a tool to keep kids away from adult content online. Australia’s restriction on social media for users under 16 has put major platforms on notice. In the U.S., the debate over requiring age assurance measures for pornographic content sites has reached the Supreme Court. And in the UK, with the Online Safety Act coming into place, there are questions about how international cooperation and collaboration will play a role in creating an online environment that prioritizes the safety of kids. How does one create so-called ‘future-proof regulation?’
A recent Westminster eForum policy conference focused on the issue of child online safety across perspectives – and specifically, the next steps for policy and practice.
In the words of event chair, Professor Sonia Livingstone from the department of Media and Communications at the London School of Economics and Political Science, it is “an incredibly complex environment” that is global in scope.
Cooperation key among regional bodies regulating borderless online world
Martin Harris Hess, Head of the European Commission’s Sector for the Protection of Children Online, notes the current proliferation of parallel online safety regulations around the world, underlining that no policy is applied in isolation, but is “part of a wider regulatory ecosystem.”
From the incoming UK Online Safety Act and the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) to the GDPR and AI Act, there are an increasing number of frameworks aiming to govern aspects of the same issue, both in the context of their national situation and the global internet.
Owen Bennett, head of international online safety for Ofcom, says the UK regulator’s work aims to “cohere and align as much as possible with the approach of our counterparts” working on similar online safety regulations internationally.
Bennett says Ofcom is “humble enough to recognize that we don’t have all the answers to some of these online safety challenges, and that other regulators may come up with different ideas that can also be valuable.”
Globally, the “regulatory toolbox that we have and what we’re expected to implement is very, very new.” As such, bilateral relationships are crucial. “International coordination is essential to ensure the rules are effective in practice and to ensure there are no safety gaps.”
Silicon Valley lobbying U.S. government to skirt international regulations
In a roundtable exploring the latest thinking on “collaboration, challenges and practical steps for creating a child-safe online environment,” experts from the policy and provider sides offer thoughts on everything from the threat of AI to the implications of Meta sacking its fact-checking team.
John Carr, Secretary, UK Children’s Charities’ Coalition on Internet Safety, echoes recent comments from UK Technology Secretary Peter Kyle, noting that “they’ve understood in Silicon Valley that, on their own, as companies, they cannot challenge or beat states. They cannot defeat laws once they are made by governments.”
Hence, their appeal to U.S. regulators (and incoming presidents) to help free American companies from the yoke of global censorship. “A process is now underway, by some of the biggest and most powerful tech companies in the world to delegitimize the whole idea of legislation such as the Online Safety Act.” In light of that, Carr says, it’s important to give regulators a chance to make their laws work.
Age assurance whirlwind takes AVPA to Texas for Supreme Court ruling
A key piece of the pie in creating an “age-aware internet” is age assurance. Iain Corby, director of the Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA), says 2025 is set to be a busy year in regulations, with Ofcom expected to publish this week their guidance on “highly effective age assurance.”
How Ofcom defines “highly effective age assurance” has irked AVPA before, and it remains a concern: the age verification providers want precise numerical clarity on requirements. Their worries about language are shared by Rachael Annear, a partner at global law firm Freshfields, who asks, “what do we know about what counts as highly effective?” The current draft guidance offers “indications” in terms of technical accuracy, robustness, reliability and fairness. But it “doesn’t give any easy answers.”
AVPA is also closely following this week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision on whether or not it is, as Corby puts it, “an affront to free speech to ‘burden’ adults with the ten-second process which is checking their age online before they access adult content.”
What happens in Silicon Valley, Corby notes, tends to have an impact around the world. “If age verification is found to be completely unconstitutional in the U.S., then we’ll probably have to move to other mechanisms for doing age verification – many of which we think would be a good idea anyway.”
Another big test (literally) for age assurance is underway in Australia, with the Age Check Certification Scheme’s age assurance trial. And the EU has tied age verification to its EU Digital Identity wallet scheme. All of this promises that the coming year is likely to see major developments in the ongoing age assurance debate, as regulations evolve and legal decisions settle a presently turbulent landscape.
Article Topics
age estimation | age verification | AVPA | biometrics | European Commission | Ofcom | regulation
Comments