UK Online Safety Regulations and impact on Forums

Well thanks to you, I have youtube restricted to only showing clips of videos from the same account as the embedded video :-)
 
This was the quote I was trying to find the other day

"The UK's regulator for enforcing the new age verification requirements, Ofcom, has naturally advised against using a VPN as a workaround.

In a statement to the BBC, it confirmed that it will be illegal for platforms to "host, share or permit content encouraging the use of VPNs to get around age checks".

So yes it does seem that advertising VPN's on a site that comes under the remit of the OSA could be an issue. But presumably only if it's a site that actually requires age veriification - eg an adult site or certain topic site.

www.techradar.com

Angry UK internet users want to repeal the Online Safety Act – here are 5 reasons why

There are a plenty of dissenting voices, as age verification kicks in
www.techradar.com www.techradar.com
 
Published 4 days ago by Gov - so it looks like you would be expected to block ads from vpn's yes.

"Virtual Private Networks

While Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) are legal in the UK, according to this law, platforms have a clear responsibility to prevent children from bypassing safety protections. This includes blocking content that promotes VPNs or other workarounds specifically aimed at young users.


This means that where platforms deliberately target UK children and promote VPN use, they could face enforcement action, including significant financial penalties."
www.gov.uk

Keeping children safe online: changes to the Online Safety Act explained

How new laws that keep children safe on the internet work.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk
 
I see Kyle, the clueless Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology has put his name to the Government press release (linked above) which states...

'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater.'

Really? So now the Act protects freedom of expression with the same eye-watering financial penalties for noncompliance? I must have missed that while wading through the bazillion pages of waffle relating to the Act.
 
Last edited:
It does say somewhere in the risk assessment stuff that you must also provide for freedom of speech and clarify how in TOS. How someone defines that is another matter. :rolleyes:
 
Alvin63 said:
It does say somewhere in the risk assessment stuff that you must also provide for freedom of speech and clarify how in TOS.
Click to expand...
I remember that but I don't recall reading anything about being fined for noncompliance. Can I just say ********? No didn't think so, there's goes Xenforo's Christmas bonus.
 
Oh we allow swearing but mind you our forum is adults who speak about their families.
I suggest if you're family friendly to have swear filters in place.
If you don't want to filter the swearwords out you could change the c bomb to some other word and keep the f bomb filtered out.
 
Someone better ask Lucy Connolly about her right to 'Freedom of Expression' then as it led her to a 3 year stint in HM Prison courtesy of Two-Tier Starmer, and Co
 
Have this in my Terms and Rules re Freedom of expression

"Freedom of Expression

We respect your right to freedom of expression when posting on this site. However, this does not include bullying, harrassment, or any other illegal harms"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom