Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday January 20 2023, @04:09PM   Printer-friendly

UK lawmakers vote to jail tech execs who fail to protect kids online:

The United Kingdom wants to become the safest place for children to grow up online. Many UK lawmakers have argued that the only way to guarantee that future is to criminalize tech leaders whose platforms knowingly fail to protect children. Today, the UK House of Commons reached a deal to appease those lawmakers, Reuters reports, with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's government agreeing to modify the Online Safety Bill to ensure its passage. It now appears that tech company executives found to be "deliberately" exposing children to harmful content could soon risk steep fines and jail time of up to two years.

The agreement was reached during the safety bill's remaining stages before a vote in the House of Commons. Next, it will move on to review by the House of Lords, where the BBC reports it will "face a lengthy journey." Sunak says he will revise the bill to include new terms before it reaches the House of Lords, where lawmakers will have additional opportunities to revise the wording.

Reports say that tech executives responsible for platforms hosting user-generated content would only be liable if they fail to take "proportionate measures" to prevent exposing children to harmful content, such as materials featuring child sexual abuse, child abuse, eating disorders, and self-harm. Some measures that tech companies can take to avoid jail time and fines of up to 10 percent of a company's global revenue include adding age verification, providing parental controls, and policing content.

If passed, the Online Safety Bill would make managers liable for holding tech companies to their own community guidelines, including content and age restrictions. If a breach of online safety duties is discovered, UK media regulator Ofcom would be responsible for prosecuting tech leaders who fail to respond to enforcement notices. Anyone found to be acting in good faith to police content and protect kids reportedly won't be prosecuted.

[...] "The onus for keeping young people safe online will sit squarely on the tech companies' shoulders," Donelan wrote. "You or your child will not have to change any settings or apply any filters to shield them from harmful content. Social media companies and their executives in Silicon Valley will have to build these protections into their platforms—and if they fail in their responsibilities, they will face severe legal consequences."


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Friday January 20 2023, @07:41PM (2 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 20 2023, @07:41PM (#1287780) Journal

    I like the concept of making executives criminally liable. But the devil is in the details. Can an overly enthusiastic prosecutor put someone in prison for some minor mistakes? That's no good. Going the other direction, how many loopholes are there for the exec who just doesn't give a damn what the kids see? How easy is it to shift blame to flunkies who are just doing what the exec told them to do?

    "The bill as drafted does have 'teeth' that will ensure compliance," it said, adding that the amendment created "significant legal jeopardy for firms" and would make Britain a less attractive destination for investors.

    The implication being . . . investors WANT minors to see smut and porn?

    --
    “I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
  • (Score: 2) by sfm on Friday January 20 2023, @09:12PM

    by sfm (675) on Friday January 20 2023, @09:12PM (#1287804)

    " The implication being . . . investors WANT minors to see smut and porn? "

    Probably more along the lines of making the internet more of a pain for both
    programmers and users, thus discouraging investments.

       

  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday January 31 2023, @08:04AM

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 31 2023, @08:04AM (#1289441) Journal

    Can an overly enthusiastic prosecutor put someone in prison for some minor mistakes?

    Perhaps under the US system that is possible. The UK system is different.

    --
    I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.