Consumer Rights Wiki - User contributions [en]

Microsoft Office 365

2025-10-28T13:36:36Z

Overcoat: Typo fix

{{Incomplete|Issue 1= Lack of citations and references| Issue 2=Bottom section needs to be reworked to fit within wiki standards }}{{ToneWarning}}
'''[[wikipedia:Microsoft_365|Microsoft 365]]''' is a family of software, including Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, and Microsoft Excel. The branding '''Office 365''' was introduced in 2010 to refer to its subscription-based [[software as a service]], including hosted services such as Office on the web.

==Consumer Impact Summary==
{{Placeholder box|Overview of concerns that arise from the conduct towards users of the product (if applicable):
* User Freedom
* User Privacy
* Business Model
* Market Control}}

==Incidents==

===Microsoft Copilot on by default===
In the current version of Office 365, Microsoft Copilot is turned on by default. It can be turned off in some of the Office applications' options (Word, Excel, but not PowerPoint, though Microsoft say they'll add the "off" button to PowerPoint in February 2025).

===Forced Copilot up-sell (Oct. 2024)===
Microsoft has been accused of misleading customers from around October 2024, by suggesting they had to move to higher-priced Microsoft 365 personal and family plans that included Copilot.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-10-27 |title=Australia sues Microsoft over AI-linked subscription price hikes |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-takes-microsoft-court-says-it-misled-27-million-customers-2025-10-26/ |url-status=live |access-date=2025-10-28 |website=Reuters}}</ref><ref name="video-explanation" />

In January 2025, YouTuber Atomic Shrimp reported<ref name="video-explanation">{{cite web|author=Atomic Shrimp|title=Microsoft’s Sneaky Forced-Upsell to 365 Users; If You Don’t Need/Want Copilot, Don’t Pay for It|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYVPThx7yss|website=Youtube|date=25 Jan 2025|access-date=25 Feb 2025|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250225115451/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYVPThx7yss%2A|archive-date=25 Feb 2025}}</ref> that Microsoft had enacted a "forced up-sell" of 365's new AI Copilot feature. Users with basic accounts (now called "Classic"), such as Shrimp himself, had been informed their subscription fee was going up, but that they would enjoy new features as a result, including Copilot. In his efforts to disable Copilot, Shrimp subsequently discovered that Microsoft now offered "Classic" plans, identical to the old basic plans both in features and in subscription fee. The option to downgrade to Classic, however, was only clearly visible to enterprise users, not to personal users. In essence Microsoft upgraded users' plans without their consent and hid the option to downgrade. While Atomic Shrimp's video suggested contacting support to revert to the "Classic" plan, it is possible to downgrade a personal account through the website via the cancellation process.

In October 2025, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) sued Microsoft over the change, accusing it of misleading about 2.7 million customers.<ref name=":0" />

===File Request===
File request, a common feature in other cloud service providers' ''free'' plans, that allows you to invite users to anonymously upload files to a designated cloud folder (e.g. group vacation photos) is only available in personal plans if every uploader is logged-in to a Microsoft account. If you want anonymous uploads, you have to upgrade to a One Drive for Business-Account. Since this is a common feature in other providers' free private plans (e.g. Dropbox), consumers subconsciously expect it to be a feature in paid personal OneDrive plans of the highest tier, but it's not offered.

===Obfuscation of local saving in favor of OneDrive===
Because of OneDrive, since the introduction of Office 365, saving files locally has been getting more and more difficult to do. Previously, the user would get the expected saving dialog with a pop-up to browse their computer and choose a file-storage location. This is now multiple clicks away, making it harder to avoid saving the file on OneDrive, Microsoft's cloud service.

Files on one's computer are also automatically uploaded to OneDrive by default, causing numerous issues (such as synchronization errors and duplicate files) Turning off this automatic backup is also of considerable difficulty, as one has to navigate a number of settings to get to this option.

To mitigate this somewhat, user can go into Options > Save > Set the check mark on "save locally as default". It still takes multiple clicks to save a file, but the cloud options are at least a bit less intrusive.

===Forced Diagnostic Data Transmission===
Versions other than the Enterprise or Education volume licensing editions do not allow turning telemetry off fully. Moreover, the setting is configured to the least private setting by default.

Office transmits data about 23 000 to 25 000 different types of events<ref>https://www.privacycompany.eu/blog/impact-assessment-shows-privacy-risks-microsoft-office-proplus-enterprise</ref> (other reports in context of the German BSI audit speak of 30 000 types of events) to Microsoft. Microsoft can adjust the level of detail transmitted remotely. This can go up to every single keystroke being broadcast live to Microsoft servers in the background.

Given that it is not uncommon in some countries even for hospital to run consumer versions of the software, the privacy implications are tremendous. It cannot reasonably be assumed that any data entered into nor any interaction with a Microsoft Office application will stay private.

===Publisher Removal from Microsoft 365 Computers (Oct. 2026)===
In October 2026, Microsoft will be removing Publisher from computers<ref>{{Cite web |last=Poremsky |first=Diane |date=2025-03-31 |title=Can people keep using Microsoft Publisher unsupported after the end of support date in October 2026 |url=https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5389573/can-people-keep-using-microsoft-publisher-unsuppor}}</ref> with Microsoft 365 as part of their "end of support" of the application.

===Automatically saving Word Documents to the Cloud (August 2025)===
In its company blog, Microsoft announced that Word would from now on create documents and save their autosave information to Microsoft servers by default. This setting can be manually reconfigured to use the local computer.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Munoz |first=Raoul |date=2025-08-26 |title=Save new files automatically to the cloud in Word for Windows |url=https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/microsoft365insiderblog/save-new-files-automatically-to-the-cloud-in-word-for-windows/4445216 |access-date=2025-08-28 |website=Microsoft 365 Insider Blog}}</ref>

This leads to all information in the document being uploaded to Microsoft servers even before a user has the chance to select local storage when first saving the document.

==How to avoid Price Increase (At least for Microsoft 365 Personal Subscriptions)==
[[File:Screenshot 2025-04-05 205541.jpg|thumb|Cancel Microsoft 365 Personal Screenshot, showing the cheaper subscription plan]]
If you currently have a "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription, and don't want to pay the $30 price increase, there is a way to "revert" back to the $69.99 subscription. Sign in to your Microsoft account, and go to your current subscriptions. Click on your "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription, then click on cancel subscription. It will then give you the option to switch to the "Microsoft 365 Personal Classic" subscription (see image to right for reference), which is Microsoft's new name for what was the "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription. There is a [https://www.reddit.com/r/microsoft/comments/1i7jrek/microsoft_365_personal_goes_up_in_price_by_30/ reddit thread] on how to do this, which is linked if you want to read through it as well.

==See also==
*[[Software as a service]]
*[[Dark pattern]]
*[[Microsoft]]

==References==

[[Category:Microsoft Office]]
[[Category:Subscription-based services]]
[[Category:Microsoft]]
<references />

Microsoft Office 365

2025-10-28T13:35:07Z

Overcoat: Cleaned up forced upsell section and added Australia legal action details.

{{Incomplete|Issue 1= Lack of citations and references| Issue 2=Bottom section needs to be reworked to fit within wiki standards }}{{ToneWarning}}
'''[[wikipedia:Microsoft_365|Microsoft 365]]''' is a family of software, including Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, and Microsoft Excel. The branding '''Office 365''' was introduced in 2010 to refer to its subscription-based [[software as a service]], including hosted services such as Office on the web.

==Consumer Impact Summary==
{{Placeholder box|Overview of concerns that arise from the conduct towards users of the product (if applicable):
* User Freedom
* User Privacy
* Business Model
* Market Control}}

==Incidents==

===Microsoft Copilot on by default===
In the current version of Office 365, Microsoft Copilot is turned on by default. It can be turned off in some of the Office applications' options (Word, Excel, but not PowerPoint, though Microsoft say they'll add the "off" button to PowerPoint in February 2025).

===Forced Copilot up-sell (Oct. 2024)===
Microsoft has been accused of misleading customers from around October 2024, by suggesting they had to move to higher-priced Microsoft 365 personal and family plans that included Copilot.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-10-27 |title=Australia sues Microsoft over AI-linked subscription price hikes |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-takes-microsoft-court-says-it-misled-27-million-customers-2025-10-26/ |url-status=live |access-date=2025-10-28 |website=Reuters}}</ref><ref name="video-explanation" />

In January 2025, YouTuber Atomic Shrimp reported<ref name="video-explanation">{{cite web|author=Atomic Shrimp|title=Microsoft’s Sneaky Forced-Upsell to 365 Users; If You Don’t Need/Want Copilot, Don’t Pay for It|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYVPThx7yss|website=Youtube|date=25 Jan 2025|access-date=25 Feb 2025|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250225115451/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYVPThx7yss%2A|archive-date=25 Feb 2025}}</ref> that Microsoft had enacted a "forced up-sell" of 365's new AI Copilot feature. Users with basic accounts (now called "Classic"), such as Shrimp himself, had been informed their subscription fee was going up, but that they would enjoy new features as a result, including Copilot. In his efforts to disable Copilot, Shrimp subsequently discovered that Microsoft now offered "Classic" plans, identical to the old basic plans both in features and in subscription fee. The option to downgrade to Classic, however, was only clearly visible to enterprise users, not to personal users. In essence Microsoft upgraded users' plans without their consent and hid the option to downgrade. While Atomic Shrimp's video suggested contacting support to revert to the "Classic" plan, it is possible to downgrade a personal account through the website without via the cancellation process.

In October 2025, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) sued Microsoft over the change, accusing it of misleading about 2.7 million customers.<ref name=":0" />

=== File Request ===
File request, a common feature in other cloud service providers' ''free'' plans, that allows you to invite users to anonymously upload files to a designated cloud folder (e.g. group vacation photos) is only available in personal plans if every uploader is logged-in to a Microsoft account. If you want anonymous uploads, you have to upgrade to a One Drive for Business-Account. Since this is a common feature in other providers' free private plans (e.g. Dropbox), consumers subconsciously expect it to be a feature in paid personal OneDrive plans of the highest tier, but it's not offered.

===Obfuscation of local saving in favor of OneDrive===
Because of OneDrive, since the introduction of Office 365, saving files locally has been getting more and more difficult to do. Previously, the user would get the expected saving dialog with a pop-up to browse their computer and choose a file-storage location. This is now multiple clicks away, making it harder to avoid saving the file on OneDrive, Microsoft's cloud service.

Files on one's computer are also automatically uploaded to OneDrive by default, causing numerous issues (such as synchronization errors and duplicate files) Turning off this automatic backup is also of considerable difficulty, as one has to navigate a number of settings to get to this option.

To mitigate this somewhat, user can go into Options > Save > Set the check mark on "save locally as default". It still takes multiple clicks to save a file, but the cloud options are at least a bit less intrusive.

===Forced Diagnostic Data Transmission===
Versions other than the Enterprise or Education volume licensing editions do not allow turning telemetry off fully. Moreover, the setting is configured to the least private setting by default.

Office transmits data about 23 000 to 25 000 different types of events<ref>https://www.privacycompany.eu/blog/impact-assessment-shows-privacy-risks-microsoft-office-proplus-enterprise</ref> (other reports in context of the German BSI audit speak of 30 000 types of events) to Microsoft. Microsoft can adjust the level of detail transmitted remotely. This can go up to every single keystroke being broadcast live to Microsoft servers in the background.

Given that it is not uncommon in some countries even for hospital to run consumer versions of the software, the privacy implications are tremendous. It cannot reasonably be assumed that any data entered into nor any interaction with a Microsoft Office application will stay private.

===Publisher Removal from Microsoft 365 Computers (Oct. 2026)===
In October 2026, Microsoft will be removing Publisher from computers<ref>{{Cite web |last=Poremsky |first=Diane |date=2025-03-31 |title=Can people keep using Microsoft Publisher unsupported after the end of support date in October 2026 |url=https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5389573/can-people-keep-using-microsoft-publisher-unsuppor}}</ref> with Microsoft 365 as part of their "end of support" of the application.

===Automatically saving Word Documents to the Cloud (August 2025)===
In its company blog, Microsoft announced that Word would from now on create documents and save their autosave information to Microsoft servers by default. This setting can be manually reconfigured to use the local computer.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Munoz |first=Raoul |date=2025-08-26 |title=Save new files automatically to the cloud in Word for Windows |url=https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/microsoft365insiderblog/save-new-files-automatically-to-the-cloud-in-word-for-windows/4445216 |access-date=2025-08-28 |website=Microsoft 365 Insider Blog}}</ref>

This leads to all information in the document being uploaded to Microsoft servers even before a user has the chance to select local storage when first saving the document.

==How to avoid Price Increase (At least for Microsoft 365 Personal Subscriptions)==
[[File:Screenshot 2025-04-05 205541.jpg|thumb|Cancel Microsoft 365 Personal Screenshot, showing the cheaper subscription plan]]
If you currently have a "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription, and don't want to pay the $30 price increase, there is a way to "revert" back to the $69.99 subscription. Sign in to your Microsoft account, and go to your current subscriptions. Click on your "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription, then click on cancel subscription. It will then give you the option to switch to the "Microsoft 365 Personal Classic" subscription (see image to right for reference), which is Microsoft's new name for what was the "Microsoft 365 Personal" subscription. There is a [https://www.reddit.com/r/microsoft/comments/1i7jrek/microsoft_365_personal_goes_up_in_price_by_30/ reddit thread] on how to do this, which is linked if you want to read through it as well.

==See also==
*[[Software as a service]]
*[[Dark pattern]]
*[[Microsoft]]

==References==

[[Category:Microsoft Office]]
[[Category:Subscription-based services]]
[[Category:Microsoft]]
<references />

5CA

2025-10-13T10:52:04Z

Overcoat: Added 5CA info and Discord data breach info

{{CompanyCargo
|Founded=1998
|Industry=Customer Service Outsourcing
|Logo=5ca logo.jpg
|Type=Private
|Website=https://5ca.com
|Description=5CA is a remote-first CX company representing some of the biggest names in gaming and tech.
}}5CA is a customer support outsourcing and technology company used by gaming and tech brands.

==Consumer-impact summary==

=== User Privacy ===
5CA have been the source of at least one known data breach, involving the exposure of approximately 70,000 government IDs of Discord users.<ref name=":0">{{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 |access-date=2025-10-13 |website=Discord}}</ref>

==Incidents==
This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

=== Discord Third-Party Customer Service data breach (Oct. 2025) ===
{{Main|Discord / 5CA Data Breach}}
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". The total number of ID images exposed was approximately 70,000.<ref name=":0" />

==See also==
[[Discord]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

5CA

2025-10-13T10:37:25Z

Overcoat: Added 5CA page

{{CompanyCargo
|Founded=1998
|Industry=Customer Service Outsourcing
|Logo=5ca logo.jpg
|Type=Private
|Website=https://5ca.com
|Description=5CA is a remote-first CX company representing some of the biggest names in gaming and tech.
}}
{{Ph-C-Int}}

==Consumer-impact summary==
{{Ph-C-CIS}}

==Incidents==
{{Ph-C-Inc}}

This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].
===Example incident one (''date'')===
{{Main|link to the main CR Wiki article}}
Short summary of the incident (could be the same as the summary preceding the article).
===Example incident two (''date'')===
...

==Products==
{{Ph-C-P}}

==See also==
{{Ph-C-SA}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

Discord

2025-10-13T10:21:29Z

Overcoat: Updated details of Third-Party Customer Service Data Breach (Oct. 2025)

{{ToneWarning}}

'''Discord''' is a proprietary VoIP and instant-messaging platform developed by Discord Inc. (formerly Hammer & Chisel, Inc.), co-founded by Jason Citron and Stanislav Vishnevskiy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gonzalez |first=Guadalupe |date=3 May 2018 |title=There Are 2.6 Billion Online Gamers in the World. This Startup Just May Connect Them All |url=https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503131556/https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |archive-date=3 May 2018 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Inc.}}</ref> Launched in 2015, the service has grown to over 150 million monthly active users as of 2025. While initially marketed toward PC gamers, Discord has expanded to multiple platforms, serving various communities and use cases, such as education.<ref name="about-company">{{Cite web |date=15 Apr 2024 |title=About Discord <nowiki>|</nowiki> Our Mission and Values |url=https://discord.com/company/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250608013037/https://discord.com/company |archive-date=8 Jun 2025 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Discord}}</ref>

In April 2025, Humam Sakhnini (formerly King, Activision Blizzard) replaced Jason Citron as CEO.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Discord Appoints Humam Sakhnini as Chief Executive Officer |url=https://discord.com/press-releases/discord-appoints-new-ceo-humam-sakhnini}}</ref> {{InfoboxCompany
| Name = Discord Inc.
| Type = Private
| Founded = 2015
| Industry = Software
| Official Website = https://discord.com
| Logo = Discord.svg
}}

==Consumer Impact Summary==

===Privacy<ref name="terms-of-service3">[https://discord.com/terms/ "Discord's Terms of Service"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3">[https://discord.com/privacy/ "Discord Privacy Policy"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref><ref name="community-guidelines2">[https://discord.com/guidelines/ "Discord Community Guidelines"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>
*Collects extensive user data, including messages, voice communications, and server participation.
*Claims broad rights to user-generated content.
*Deleted messages are stored for undefined periods.
*Retains personal information until deemed "no longer needed" with undefined retention periods.
*Processes user content for "safety features and platform improvement".
*Shares data with related companies, vendors, and third-party service providers.
*Opt-out behavioral tracking across platform features for personalization.
*Maintains logs of IP addresses and device information for an undetermined amount of time, flags any user who has ever signed in with an EU IP address for inclusion within DSA transparency reports
*Sends a web request when any UI element is clicked & when typing
*A phone number is randomly required, and the account will be locked until a phone number is added, regardless of account age or recent activity. The account will be automatically locked if the phone number is removed.

===Freedom===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3" />
*Mandatory [[Forced Arbitration|binding arbitration]] with [[class action|class-action]] waiver for U.S. users (Started 19 October 2018).
*Users grant a perpetual, transferable license to their content.
*Users must accept the broad terms of service that allow unilateral changes.
*Accounts can be terminated without prior notice at Discord's discretion.

*No option to opt out of core data collection while using the service.
*Content may be retained by Discord even after deletion.
*Server owners have limited recourse if their servers are banned.
*Forced to use Discord's payment processing for all monetary transactions.

===Transparency===
Discord terms of service are lengthy and complex, in Oct 2025, just the base terms are 29 pages, 14th grade (Junior in college) reading level, estimated reading time 42 minutes.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Calculated using readabilitychecker.com based on current discord TOS. |url=readabilitychecker.com |access-date=9 Oct 2025}}</ref> The terms incorporate extensive additional material; a 2021 version of Discord TOS, featured in "EULAs of despair", would take an estimated 275+ hours to read.<ref>{{Cite web |title=EULA of despair |url=https://www.pilotlab.org/eulas-of-despair |access-date=9 Oct 2025 |website=Penn State University Pilot Lab}}</ref>

Mentioned within the '''Discord Privacy Policy'''<ref name="privacy-policy3" /> and '''Community Guidelines''':<ref name="community-guidelines2" />
*Unclear processes for handling law enforcement requests.
*Vague about specific data retention time frames.
*Limited transparency regarding content moderation decisions.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=BBB - Discord, Inc. |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699 |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=[[Better Business Bureau]]}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Trustpilot - Discord |url=https://www.trustpilot.com/review/discord.com |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=Trustpilot}}</ref>
**In some instances, the offending content is not shown to the user, nor any metadata, filenames, timestamps, or even the originating channel.
**No limits or restrictions on the age of content (e.g., users can be suspended due to something sent 1500 days ago)
*Server ban appeals process lacks transparency.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" />
*Limited disclosure of recommendation algorithm factors.
*No clear disclosure of how the content is used for platform improvement.
==Incidents==
===Introduction of forced arbitration (Oct. 2018)===
In October 2018, [[Forced Arbitration|forced arbitration]] would be added to the [[Terms of Service|terms of service]]. Users could opt out by sending an 'opt-out notice' to arbitration-opt-out@discord.com within the 90 days the after ToS going in effect or registering their first account.'''<ref name="terms-of-service3" />'''

===Child safety concerns (June 2023)===
An [[wikipedia:NBC News|NBC News]] investigation in June 2023<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFGoggin2023" class="citation web cs1">Goggin, Ben (21 Jun 2023). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 "Child predators are using Discord, a popular app among teens, for sextortion and abductions"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20230621152318/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 Archived] from the original on 21 Jun 2023. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Child+predators+are+using+Discord%2C+a+popular+app+among+teens%2C+for+sextortion+and+abductions&rft.date=2023-06-21&rft.aulast=Goggin&rft.aufirst=Ben&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsocial-media%2Fdiscord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref> uncovered widespread child-safety issues on Discord, revealing systemic problems with the platform's user protection measures.

Investigators identified 35 separate cases where adults were criminally charged with "kidnapping, grooming, or sexual assault" involving contacts initiated through Discord. Additionally, 165 criminal prosecutions involving the sharing of child sexual exploitation material (CSAM) on the platform were documented.

===FTC data collection investigation (Sept. 2024)===
In September 2024, the [[Federal Trade Commission]] (FTC) released a comprehensive report examining Discord's data-collection practices as part of a broader investigation into social-media platforms.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite class="citation web cs1">[https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf "A Look Behind the Screens: Examining the Data Practices of Social Media and Video Streaming Services"] (PDF). ''Federal Trade Commission''. 11 Sep 2024. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919133855/https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf Archived] (PDF) from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=Federal+Trade+Commission&rft.atitle=A+Look+Behind+the+Screens%3A+Examining+the+Data+Practices+of+Social+Media+and+Video+Streaming+Services&rft.date=2024-09-11&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftc.gov%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fftc_gov%2Fpdf%2FSocial-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

The investigation revealed Discord collects extensive user data, including:
*Message content and metadata
*Voice-chat participation
*Server membership and activity
*Device and location information
Particular concern was raised about:
*[https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-312 Collection of data from users under 13]
*Handling of minor user information
*Inadequate age-verification systems
The FTC identified multiple areas where Discord's practices put users at risk:
*Identity-theft exposure
*Potential stalking risks
*Discrimination concerns
*Mental health and emotional impact

The FTC concluded that Discord's data practices created unacceptable risks for users, particularly minors, and called for significant reforms to the platform's privacy protection measures.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFTolentino2024" class="citation web cs1">Tolentino, Daysia (19 Sep 2024). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 "Social media companies engaged in 'vast surveillance,' FTC finds, calling status quo 'unacceptable'"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919171049/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 Archived] from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Social+media+companies+engaged+in+%27vast+surveillance%2C%27+FTC+finds%2C+calling+status+quo+%27unacceptable%27&rft.date=2024-09-19&rft.aulast=Tolentino&rft.aufirst=Daysia&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsecurity%2Fsocial-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

===Reinforcement of forced arbitration (Sept. 2025)===
Announced August 29th, 2025, and put into effect September 29th, 2025, Discord updated and re-iterated their [[forced arbitration]] clause, but gave users another option to opt-out of forced arbitration until October 29th, 2025 for existing accounts, or 30-days after initial agreement for new accounts.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-29 |title=Discord's Terms of Service |url=https://discord.com/terms#16 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251007023150/https://discord.com/terms#16 |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2025-10-06 |website=Discord.com}}</ref> Users are automatically opted into the forced arbitration clause if no action is taken to specifically opt-out of forced arbitration within 30 days. Instead, if the users chose to delete their accounts, the platform forced them to accept the terms in order to access their account, from which to delete it; making accepting the new terms mandatory.
[[File:Discord Forced Arbitration 1.png|alt=An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application.|thumb|(2025-09-29) An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application. The terms of service at the time of this screenshot includes forced arbitration and disallows users from filing a class-action lawsuit.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Discord |date=2025-09-29 |title=Terms of Service {{!}} Discord |url=https://discord.com/terms |url-status=live |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Discord}}</ref>]]

===Third-Party Customer Service Data Breach (Oct. 2025)===
In 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", as well as other personal data provided to support.<ref name=":2">{{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}}</ref> The number of ID images accessed was approximately 70,000, and the third-party in question was later named as 5CA.<ref name=":2" /> The hackers involved in the breach have revealed the data was accessed via Zendesk.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hunt |first=Troy |date=2025-10-04 |title=X |url=https://x.com/troyhunt/status/1974558088847102289}}</ref>
===Vague moderation===
{{Main|Discord's irresponsible moderation}}Reported countless times by users on the BBB<ref name=":0" />, Trustpilot <ref name=":1" /> and a dedicated subreddit<ref>{{Cite web |title=/r/BannedFromDiscord |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/BannedFromDiscord/}}</ref> users have complained about how Discord's moderation is extremely vague. One such user reported their account being banned from the BBB,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mir |first=Zain |date=Jul 23, 2025 |title=BBB Complaint |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699/complaints?page=2#1116_918699_23643523 |access-date=Aug 1, 2025 |website=Better Business Bureau}}</ref> with an automated system handling the entire process, replying only with templates, without having a human involved in the appeal process.

===How to delete account without agreeing to ToS===
Visit [https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/212500837-How-to-Delete-your-Discord-Account How to delete Discord account] and scroll to "Having Trouble Deleting Your Discord Account?" Find the link titled "Reach out to our support team". Direct link subject to user instance - http://dis.gd/support

Fill out the "Submit a request" form. (A web search for "Submit a request Discord" may help users find the form. Be sure to answer the question "What can we help you with" with "Help and Support" from the drop down.) '''Fill out the form with the same email address connected to the Discord account or this process may need to be restarted!'''

In the form, under "Type of question" there is an option for "Account deletion request". Proceed to fill out and submit the form with any other relevant information.

An email will then be sent with further instructions, including on how to proceed with account deletion, namely by responding to the email with "I confirm that I would like to delete the account associated with [user email]". '''This must be received from the same email as the associated Discord email.'''[[File:Discord Vague Infringement example.png|thumb|An example of how Discord handles its moderation from a user's perspective.]]
==References==
<references />

[[Category:Discord]]
[[Category:Forced Arbitration]]

UK Online Safety Act

2025-10-13T10:05:43Z

Overcoat: Clarified Discord data breach details

{{IncidentCargo
|StartDate=2023-10-26
|Status=Active
|Type=Digital restrictions
|Description=On 26 October 2023, the UK Online Safety Act passed and became law. This act restricts the freedom of UK users of the internet and increases censorship.
|ArticleType=Legislation}}

United Kingdom's [[wikipedia:Online Safety Act 2023|Online Safety Act 2023]] (OSA) is a set of laws that claims to protect children and adults online.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=April 24, 2025 |title=Online Safety Act: explainer |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer |website=Gov.uk}}</ref> The act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-4 Section 4]).

One of the duties of the act requires affected websites to implement their own solution for identity verification such that it is highly effective to prove one's age ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-12-6 Section 12.6]). There is no official government-sanctioned identity verification platform. Each service provider must implement their own solution or find a third party solution to use to remain compliant. Another duty filters non-verified users from interacting with content made from an "adult user" ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-15-10 Section 15.10])<ref name="rossmann:1">{{Cite web|date=August 1, 2025|last=Rossmann |first=Louis |title=Tea app & UK Online Safety Act - the world is becoming a black mirror episode :(| url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNNsCuEvR5w&t=114 |ref=rossmann:1 |website=[[YouTube]] |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>. These non-verified users will also be less visible, provided the adult user has toggled it.

While the press release says "the measures platforms have to put in place must confirm your age without collecting or storing personal data, unless absolutely necessary,"<ref name=":3">{{Cite news |last=Kyle |first=Peter |date=2025-08-01 |title=Keeping children safe online: changes to the Online Safety Act explained |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/keeping-children-safe-online-changes-to-the-online-safety-act-explained |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Gov.UK}}</ref> the legislation requires that companies track usage by specific people and provide data and/or remote access to Ofcom on demand ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-100 Section 100]) <ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |date=2025-07-25 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50 |journal=UK Public General Acts |volume=2023 |issue=50}}</ref>
Enforcement of this act is done by the UK's Office of Communications (Ofcom). The penalty for breaking these rules is the greater of £18 million and 10% of the person’s qualifying worldwide revenue ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#schedule-13-paragraph-4 Schedule 13.4]).<ref name=":1" />

==Background==
The Online Safety Act is a "Bill to make provision for and in connection with the regulation by Ofcom of certain internet services; for and in connection with communications offences; and for connected purposes."<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-19 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=UK Parliament: Parliamentary Bills}}</ref>

The Online Safety Act received royal assent on 26 October 2023, following five years of work by Carnegie UK, working in concert with over 50 partners. In 2018, Carnegie UK published a series of blogs by William Perrin and Professor Lorna Woods, outlining the proposal for social media regulation.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-09-01 |title=Tackling Online Harms |url=https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241225063325/https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |archive-date=2025-12-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref> The UK Government published its [https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper White Paper] on 8 April 2019, tackling online harm, with a duty of care approach at its core. Carnegie UK ended their work on the Online Safety Act in October 2023.<ref name="online-safety-and-carnegie-uk">{{Cite web |last=Davidson |first=Sarah |date=26 October 2023 |title=Online safety and Carnegie UK |url=https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250701203854/https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-date=2025-07-01 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Kate |date=August 7, 2025| title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship| url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/ |website=Novara Media |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>

The bill was sponsored by Michelle Donelan, the (now former) Conservative MP for Chippenham and Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, a current member of the House of Lords. Both on behalf of the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. <ref name=":4" />

The Online Safety Act is one act in two different stages. The original that reached royal assent on 26 October 2023 under Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, and the amended version in 2025, under Kier Starmer's Labour government. In February 2025, amendments related to making corporations more accountable for the content on their websites, as well as accountability for people accessing inappropriate content were brought to and voted on in parliament. The bill was changed again in May 2025 to include biometric face scans and government ID requirements, which was was not voted on in parliament.

[https://avpassociation.com/ Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA)] was formed in 2018 and is growing rapidly as the age and identity provider industry takes off. It represents all main technology suppliers who have invested in the development of age verification solutions to support the implementation of age restrictions online. <ref>{{Cite web |title=Age Verification Providers Association |url=https://avpassociation.com/}}</ref>

==The impact==
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".

===Spotify===
To view age-restricted content on [[Spotify]], users in the UK are now asked for facial scanning; if that fails, only ID verification can correct the error.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cole |first=Samantha |title=Spotify Is Forcing Users to Undergo Face Scanning to Access Explicit Content |url=https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |access-date=3 August 2025 |work=404 Media |date=30 July 2025 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20250730160610/https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |archive-date=30 July 2025 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===YouTube===
{{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>

===Wikipedia===
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) 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>

===4Chan===
4chan is a simple image-based bulletin board where anyone can post comments and share images.

====Ofcom's investigation====
On 14 April 2025, Ofcom issued a formal information notice to the provider of the service 4chan requesting a copy of the record of its Illegal Content Risk Assessment, as part of the [https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/enforcement-programme-to-monitor-if-services-meet-their-illegal-content-risk-assessment-and-record-keeping-duties-under-the-online-safety-act-2023 Risk Assessment Enforcement Programme]. At the date of opening this investigation, no response has been received to the information notice. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-13 |title=Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users from illegal content |url=https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250615131417/https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-date=2025-06-15 |access-date=2025-08-18 |website=Ofcom}}</ref>

On 10 June 2025, Ofcom opened an investigation into "the online discussion board" 4chan. The investigation will consider 4chan's compliance with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023. Ofcom has powers under [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-102-8 section 102(8)] of the Act to require persons to respond to an information notice in the manner and form specified.

On 13 August 2025, Ofcom, in accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention, believing they had reasonable grounds for believing 4chan has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply (Ofcom.org appears to have blocked Archive.org from this and other pages sometime in July 2025).

====4chan's response====
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>

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>

==Data breaches including ID documents==
Since the Online Safety Act came into effect, at least one known data breach has included sensitive ID documents used for age verification. Note that these breaches may ''not'' be linked directly to age verification methods implemented for OSA compliance, but nonetheless highlight the risks of sensitive ID documents being handled by private organizations.

===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>

==Consumer response==
According to analysis by Cloudwards, [[Google]] searches for "how to get around age verification" and "is VPN legal in the UK" saw a massive growth of over 450 thousand and 380 thousand percent respectively.<ref name=":5" /> United Kingdom saw an increased VPN usage by 1400 percent.<ref name="UK_VPN">{{Cite web |last=Speed |first=Richard |date=July 28, 2025 |title=UK VPN demand soars after debut of Online Safety Act |url=https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/28/uk_vpn_demand_soars/ |access-date=August 15, 2025 |website=The Register}}</ref> As of 16 August 2025, there has been at least 500 thousand signatures petitioning to repeal the act.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Baynham |first=Alex |date=2025-04-22 |title=Repeal the Online Safety Act |url=https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 |website=Petitions: UK Government and Parliament}}</ref>

===OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk===
[https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/in_memoriam/ OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk] is a website which was created in response to the Act's implementation and is operated by Neil Brown<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk |url=https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/contact/ |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk}}</ref>, a UK tech lawyer ([https://decoded.legal decoded.legal]).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=Neil Brown (@neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk) |url=https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=mastodon.neilzone.co.uk}}</ref> It lists all of the websites affected by the Online Safety Act, with the help of user submissions.

===Use Their ID===
[https://use-their-id.com/ Use Their ID.com] is a parody site that uses publicly available data about UK members of parliament to create AI-generated mock driving licences. They are clearly marked as satire and users are warned not to use them for anything real. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-28 |title=Use Their ID |url=https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730001620/https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-08-17}}</ref>

==Industry expert response==
The act has been [https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/ opposed] as early as December 2023 by Internet Society.

===Electronic Frontier Foundation===
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted an article entitled [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online], and covers the threat to privacy of internet users and how the bill restricts free expression by arbitrating speech online, exposing users to algorithmic discrimination through face checks, and leaves millions of people without a personal device or form ID excluded from accessing the internet.

"The internet must remain a place where all voices can be heard, free from discrimination or censorship by government agencies. If the UK really wants to achieve its goal of being the safest place in the world to go online, it must lead the way in introducing policies that actually protect all users—including children—rather than pushing the enforcement of legislation that harms the very people it was meant to protect."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Collings |first=Paige |date=2025-08-01 |title=No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250812070622/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-date=2025-08-12 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}</ref>

===Theo Browne, YouTuber & CEO at T3 Chat===
[[File:Online Safety Act- Offloading Responsibility. .png|thumb|Parents, government, platforms, identity providers]]Theo posted a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TZozNjPcGw YouTube video] covering the Online Safety Act and how it going to destroy the free internet if the internet community doesn't stop it ASAP. He said it's rare that he gets that extreme about something like this, but believes that it is a really important thing that the community jump in front of.

The Online Safety Act will normalise providing your government-issued identification in order to see content, making everyone more susceptible and vulnerable to phishing attacks perpetrated by identity thieves. The act also shifts the responsibility of child safety to the government, who in turn shift it to the websites, who in turn shift it to a brand new identity and age verification industry.

==Government response==
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>

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>

==See also==

*[[Ofcom]]
*[[Data Protection Act 2018]]
*[[Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom]]
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]

==References==
{{reflist}}


[[Category:Legislation in Europe]]

Discord

2025-10-07T14:12:51Z

Overcoat: Removed unnecessary link

{{ToneWarning}}

'''Discord''' is a proprietary VoIP and instant-messaging platform developed by Discord Inc. (formerly Hammer & Chisel, Inc.), co-founded by Jason Citron and Stanislav Vishnevskiy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gonzalez |first=Guadalupe |date=3 May 2018 |title=There Are 2.6 Billion Online Gamers in the World. This Startup Just May Connect Them All |url=https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503131556/https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |archive-date=3 May 2018 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Inc.}}</ref> Launched in 2015, the service has grown to over 150 million monthly active users as of 2025. While initially marketed toward PC gamers, Discord has expanded to multiple platforms, serving various communities and use cases, such as education.<ref name="about-company">{{Cite web |date=15 Apr 2024 |title=About Discord <nowiki>|</nowiki> Our Mission and Values |url=https://discord.com/company/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250608013037/https://discord.com/company |archive-date=8 Jun 2025 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Discord}}</ref>

In April 2025, Humam Sakhnini (formerly King, Activision Blizzard) replaced Jason Citron as CEO.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Discord Appoints Humam Sakhnini as Chief Executive Officer |url=https://discord.com/press-releases/discord-appoints-new-ceo-humam-sakhnini}}</ref> {{InfoboxCompany
| Name = Discord Inc.
| Type = Private
| Founded = 2015
| Industry = Software
| Official Website = https://discord.com
| Logo = Discord.svg
}}

==Consumer Impact Summary==

===Privacy<ref name="terms-of-service3">[https://discord.com/terms/ "Discord's Terms of Service"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3">[https://discord.com/privacy/ "Discord Privacy Policy"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref><ref name="community-guidelines2">[https://discord.com/guidelines/ "Discord Community Guidelines"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>
*Collects extensive user data, including messages, voice communications, and server participation.
*Claims broad rights to user-generated content.
*Deleted messages are stored for undefined periods.
*Retains personal information until deemed "no longer needed" with undefined retention periods.
*Processes user content for "safety features and platform improvement".
*Shares data with related companies, vendors, and third-party service providers.
*Opt-out behavioral tracking across platform features for personalization.
*Maintains logs of IP addresses and device information for an undetermined amount of time, flags any user who has ever signed in with an EU IP address for inclusion within DSA transparency reports
*Sends a web request when any UI element is clicked & when typing
*A phone number is randomly required, and the account will be locked until a phone number is added, regardless of account age or recent activity. The account will be automatically locked if the phone number is removed.

===Freedom===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3" />
*Mandatory [[Forced Arbitration|binding arbitration]] with [[class action|class-action]] waiver for U.S. users (Started 15 May 2024).
*Users grant a perpetual, transferable license to their content.
*Users must accept the broad terms of service that allow unilateral changes.
*Accounts can be terminated without prior notice at Discord's discretion.

*No option to opt out of core data collection while using the service.
*Content may be retained by Discord even after deletion.
*Server owners have limited recourse if their servers are banned.
*Forced to use Discord's payment processing for all monetary transactions.

===Transparency===
Mentioned within the '''Discord Privacy Policy'''<ref name="privacy-policy3" /> and '''Community Guidelines''':<ref name="community-guidelines2" />
*Unclear processes for handling law enforcement requests.
*Vague about specific data retention time frames.
*Limited transparency regarding content moderation decisions.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=BBB - Discord, Inc. |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699 |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=[[Better Business Bureau]]}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Trustpilot - Discord |url=https://www.trustpilot.com/review/discord.com |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=Trustpilot}}</ref>
**In some instances, the offending content is not shown to the user, nor any metadata, filenames, timestamps, or even the originating channel.
**No limits or restrictions on the age of content (e.g., users can be suspended due to something sent 1500 days ago)
*Server ban appeals process lacks transparency.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" />
*Limited disclosure of recommendation algorithm factors.
*No clear disclosure of how the content is used for platform improvement.
==Incidents==
===Child safety concerns (Jun. 2023)===
An [[wikipedia:NBC News|NBC News]] investigation in June 2023<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFGoggin2023" class="citation web cs1">Goggin, Ben (21 Jun 2023). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 "Child predators are using Discord, a popular app among teens, for sextortion and abductions"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20230621152318/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 Archived] from the original on 21 Jun 2023. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Child+predators+are+using+Discord%2C+a+popular+app+among+teens%2C+for+sextortion+and+abductions&rft.date=2023-06-21&rft.aulast=Goggin&rft.aufirst=Ben&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsocial-media%2Fdiscord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref> uncovered widespread child-safety issues on Discord, revealing systemic problems with the platform's user protection measures.

Investigators identified 35 separate cases where adults were criminally charged with "kidnapping, grooming, or sexual assault" involving contacts initiated through Discord. Additionally, 165 criminal prosecutions involving the sharing of child sexual exploitation material on the platform were documented.

===FTC data collection investigation (Sep. 2024)===
In September 2024, the [[Federal Trade Commission]] (FTC) released a comprehensive report examining Discord's data-collection practices as part of a broader investigation into social-media platforms.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite class="citation web cs1">[https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf "A Look Behind the Screens: Examining the Data Practices of Social Media and Video Streaming Services"] (PDF). ''Federal Trade Commission''. 11 Sep 2024. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919133855/https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf Archived] (PDF) from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=Federal+Trade+Commission&rft.atitle=A+Look+Behind+the+Screens%3A+Examining+the+Data+Practices+of+Social+Media+and+Video+Streaming+Services&rft.date=2024-09-11&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftc.gov%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fftc_gov%2Fpdf%2FSocial-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

The investigation revealed Discord collects extensive user data, including:
*Message content and metadata
*Voice-chat participation
*Server membership and activity
*Device and location information
Particular concern was raised about:
*Collection of data from users under 13
*Handling of minor user information
*Inadequate age-verification systems
The FTC identified multiple areas where Discord's practices put users at risk:
*Identity-theft exposure
*Potential stalking risks
*Discrimination concerns
*Mental health and emotional impact

The FTC concluded that Discord's data practices created unacceptable risks for users, particularly minors, and called for significant reforms to the platform's privacy protection measures.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFTolentino2024" class="citation web cs1">Tolentino, Daysia (19 Sep 2024). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 "Social media companies engaged in 'vast surveillance,' FTC finds, calling status quo 'unacceptable'"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919171049/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 Archived] from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Social+media+companies+engaged+in+%27vast+surveillance%2C%27+FTC+finds%2C+calling+status+quo+%27unacceptable%27&rft.date=2024-09-19&rft.aulast=Tolentino&rft.aufirst=Daysia&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsecurity%2Fsocial-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

===Introduction of forced arbitration (Mar. 2024)===
In March 2024, Discord users were notified via email that [[Forced Arbitration|forced arbitration]] would be added to the [[Terms of Service|terms of service]] , effective 15 April 2024. Users could opt out by sending an 'opt-out notice' to arbitration-opt-out@discord.com within the thirty days preceding 15 April 2024 or by registering their first account.'''<ref name="terms-of-service3" />'''

===Reinforcement of forced arbitration (Sept. 2025)===
Announced August 29th, 2025, and put into effect September 29th, 2025, Discord updated and re-iterated their [[forced arbitration]] clause from March 2024, but gave users another option to opt-out of forced arbitration until October 29th, 2025 for existing accounts, or 30-days after initial agreement for new accounts.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-29 |title=Discord's Terms of Service |url=https://discord.com/terms#16 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251007023150/https://discord.com/terms#16 |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2025-10-06 |website=Discord.com}}</ref> Users are automatically opted into the forced arbitration clause if no action is taken to specifically opt-out of forced arbitration within 30 days. Instead, if the users chose to delete their accounts, the platform forced them to accept the terms in order to access their account, from which to delete it; making accepting the new terms mandatory.
[[File:Discord Forced Arbitration 1.png|alt=An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application.|thumb|(2025-09-29) An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application. The terms of service at the time of this screenshot includes forced arbitration and disallows users from filing a class-action lawsuit.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Discord |date=2025-09-29 |title=Terms of Service {{!}} Discord |url=https://discord.com/terms |url-status=live |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Discord}}</ref>]]

===Third-Party Customer Service Data Breach (Oct. 2025)===
In October 2025, Discord issued a press release announcing a "Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service", 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", as well as other personal data provided to support.<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}}</ref> The third-party in question has not been formally named.
===Vague moderation===
{{Main|Discord's irresponsible moderation}}
[[File:Discord Vague Infringement example.png|thumb|An example of how Discord handles its moderation from a user's perspective.]]
Reported countlessly by users on the BBB<ref name=":0" />, Trustpilot <ref name=":1" /> and a dedicated subreddit<ref>{{Cite web |title=/r/BannedFromDiscord |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/BannedFromDiscord/}}</ref> users have complained about how Discord's moderation is extremely vague. One such user reported their account being banned from the BBB,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mir |first=Zain |date=Jul 23, 2025 |title=BBB Complaint |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699/complaints?page=2#1116_918699_23643523 |access-date=Aug 1, 2025 |website=Better Business Bureau}}</ref> with an automated system handling the entire process, replying only with templates, without having a human involved in the appeal process.

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Discord]]
[[Category:Forced Arbitration]]

Discord

2025-10-07T14:11:21Z

Overcoat: Added Oct 2025 data breach incident

{{ToneWarning}}

'''Discord''' is a proprietary VoIP and instant-messaging platform developed by Discord Inc. (formerly Hammer & Chisel, Inc.), co-founded by Jason Citron and Stanislav Vishnevskiy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gonzalez |first=Guadalupe |date=3 May 2018 |title=There Are 2.6 Billion Online Gamers in the World. This Startup Just May Connect Them All |url=https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503131556/https://www.inc.com/guadalupe-gonzalez/30-under-30-2018-discord.html |archive-date=3 May 2018 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Inc.}}</ref> Launched in 2015, the service has grown to over 150 million monthly active users as of 2025. While initially marketed toward PC gamers, Discord has expanded to multiple platforms, serving various communities and use cases, such as education.<ref name="about-company">{{Cite web |date=15 Apr 2024 |title=About Discord <nowiki>|</nowiki> Our Mission and Values |url=https://discord.com/company/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250608013037/https://discord.com/company |archive-date=8 Jun 2025 |access-date=13 Jul 2025 |website=Discord}}</ref>

In April 2025, Humam Sakhnini (formerly King, Activision Blizzard) replaced Jason Citron as CEO.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Discord Appoints Humam Sakhnini as Chief Executive Officer |url=https://discord.com/press-releases/discord-appoints-new-ceo-humam-sakhnini}}</ref> {{InfoboxCompany
| Name = Discord Inc.
| Type = Private
| Founded = 2015
| Industry = Software
| Official Website = https://discord.com
| Logo = Discord.svg
}}

==Consumer Impact Summary==

===Privacy<ref name="terms-of-service3">[https://discord.com/terms/ "Discord's Terms of Service"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3">[https://discord.com/privacy/ "Discord Privacy Policy"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref><ref name="community-guidelines2">[https://discord.com/guidelines/ "Discord Community Guidelines"]. April 15, 2024. ''Discord''. Retrieved January 16, 2025.</ref>
*Collects extensive user data, including messages, voice communications, and server participation.
*Claims broad rights to user-generated content.
*Deleted messages are stored for undefined periods.
*Retains personal information until deemed "no longer needed" with undefined retention periods.
*Processes user content for "safety features and platform improvement".
*Shares data with related companies, vendors, and third-party service providers.
*Opt-out behavioral tracking across platform features for personalization.
*Maintains logs of IP addresses and device information for an undetermined amount of time, flags any user who has ever signed in with an EU IP address for inclusion within DSA transparency reports
*Sends a web request when any UI element is clicked & when typing
*A phone number is randomly required, and the account will be locked until a phone number is added, regardless of account age or recent activity. The account will be automatically locked if the phone number is removed.

===Freedom===
Mentioned within the '''Discord TOS<ref name="terms-of-service3" />''' and '''Privacy Policy''':<ref name="privacy-policy3" />
*Mandatory [[Forced Arbitration|binding arbitration]] with [[class action|class-action]] waiver for U.S. users (Started 15 May 2024).
*Users grant a perpetual, transferable license to their content.
*Users must accept the broad terms of service that allow unilateral changes.
*Accounts can be terminated without prior notice at Discord's discretion.

*No option to opt out of core data collection while using the service.
*Content may be retained by Discord even after deletion.
*Server owners have limited recourse if their servers are banned.
*Forced to use Discord's payment processing for all monetary transactions.

===Transparency===
Mentioned within the '''Discord Privacy Policy'''<ref name="privacy-policy3" /> and '''Community Guidelines''':<ref name="community-guidelines2" />
*Unclear processes for handling law enforcement requests.
*Vague about specific data retention time frames.
*Limited transparency regarding content moderation decisions.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=BBB - Discord, Inc. |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699 |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=[[Better Business Bureau]]}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Trustpilot - Discord |url=https://www.trustpilot.com/review/discord.com |access-date=Aug 2, 2025 |website=Trustpilot}}</ref>
**In some instances, the offending content is not shown to the user, nor any metadata, filenames, timestamps, or even the originating channel.
**No limits or restrictions on the age of content (e.g., users can be suspended due to something sent 1500 days ago)
*Server ban appeals process lacks transparency.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" />
*Limited disclosure of recommendation algorithm factors.
*No clear disclosure of how the content is used for platform improvement.
==Incidents==
===Child safety concerns (Jun. 2023)===
An [[wikipedia:NBC News|NBC News]] investigation in June 2023<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFGoggin2023" class="citation web cs1">Goggin, Ben (21 Jun 2023). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 "Child predators are using Discord, a popular app among teens, for sextortion and abductions"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20230621152318/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769 Archived] from the original on 21 Jun 2023. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Child+predators+are+using+Discord%2C+a+popular+app+among+teens%2C+for+sextortion+and+abductions&rft.date=2023-06-21&rft.aulast=Goggin&rft.aufirst=Ben&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsocial-media%2Fdiscord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref> uncovered widespread child-safety issues on Discord, revealing systemic problems with the platform's user protection measures.

Investigators identified 35 separate cases where adults were criminally charged with "kidnapping, grooming, or sexual assault" involving contacts initiated through Discord. Additionally, 165 criminal prosecutions involving the sharing of child sexual exploitation material on the platform were documented.

===FTC data collection investigation (Sep. 2024)===
In September 2024, the [[Federal Trade Commission]] (FTC) released a comprehensive report examining Discord's data-collection practices as part of a broader investigation into social-media platforms.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite class="citation web cs1">[https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf "A Look Behind the Screens: Examining the Data Practices of Social Media and Video Streaming Services"] (PDF). ''Federal Trade Commission''. 11 Sep 2024. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919133855/https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Social-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf Archived] (PDF) from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=Federal+Trade+Commission&rft.atitle=A+Look+Behind+the+Screens%3A+Examining+the+Data+Practices+of+Social+Media+and+Video+Streaming+Services&rft.date=2024-09-11&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftc.gov%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fftc_gov%2Fpdf%2FSocial-Media-6b-Report-9-11-2024.pdf&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

The investigation revealed Discord collects extensive user data, including:
*Message content and metadata
*Voice-chat participation
*Server membership and activity
*Device and location information
Particular concern was raised about:
*Collection of data from users under 13
*Handling of minor user information
*Inadequate age-verification systems
The FTC identified multiple areas where Discord's practices put users at risk:
*Identity-theft exposure
*Potential stalking risks
*Discrimination concerns
*Mental health and emotional impact

The FTC concluded that Discord's data practices created unacceptable risks for users, particularly minors, and called for significant reforms to the platform's privacy protection measures.<ref><templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles><cite id="CITEREFTolentino2024" class="citation web cs1">Tolentino, Daysia (19 Sep 2024). [https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 "Social media companies engaged in 'vast surveillance,' FTC finds, calling status quo 'unacceptable'"]. ''NBC News''. [https://web.archive.org/web/20240919171049/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/social-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814 Archived] from the original on 19 Sep 2024. Retrieved 13 Jul 2025.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=NBC+News&rft.atitle=Social+media+companies+engaged+in+%27vast+surveillance%2C%27+FTC+finds%2C+calling+status+quo+%27unacceptable%27&rft.date=2024-09-19&rft.aulast=Tolentino&rft.aufirst=Daysia&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Fsecurity%2Fsocial-media-companies-engaged-vast-surveillance-ftc-finds-calling-sta-rcna171814&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fconsumerrights.wiki%3ADiscord" class="Z3988"></ref>

===Introduction of forced arbitration (Mar. 2024)===
In March 2024, Discord users were notified via email that [[Forced Arbitration|forced arbitration]] would be added to the [[Terms of Service|terms of service]] , effective 15 April 2024. Users could opt out by sending an 'opt-out notice' to arbitration-opt-out@discord.com within the thirty days preceding 15 April 2024 or by registering their first account.'''<ref name="terms-of-service3" />'''

===Reinforcement of forced arbitration (Sept. 2025)===
Announced August 29th, 2025, and put into effect September 29th, 2025, Discord updated and re-iterated their [[forced arbitration]] clause from March 2024, but gave users another option to opt-out of forced arbitration until October 29th, 2025 for existing accounts, or 30-days after initial agreement for new accounts.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-09-29 |title=Discord's Terms of Service |url=https://discord.com/terms#16 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251007023150/https://discord.com/terms#16 |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2025-10-06 |website=Discord.com}}</ref> Users are automatically opted into the forced arbitration clause if no action is taken to specifically opt-out of forced arbitration within 30 days. Instead, if the users chose to delete their accounts, the platform forced them to accept the terms in order to access their account, from which to delete it; making accepting the new terms mandatory.
[[File:Discord Forced Arbitration 1.png|alt=An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application.|thumb|(2025-09-29) An example of Discord forcing users to agree to arbitration if they want to continue using the application. The terms of service at the time of this screenshot includes forced arbitration and disallows users from filing a class-action lawsuit.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Discord |date=2025-09-29 |title=Terms of Service {{!}} Discord |url=https://discord.com/terms |url-status=live |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Discord}}</ref>]]

=== Third-Party Customer Service Data Breach (Oct. 2025) ===
In October 2025, Discord issued a [https://discord.com/press-releases/update-on-security-incident-involving-third-party-customer-service press release] announcing a "Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service", 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", as well as other personal data provided to support.<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}}</ref> The third-party in question has not been formally named.
===Vague moderation===
{{Main|Discord's irresponsible moderation}}
[[File:Discord Vague Infringement example.png|thumb|An example of how Discord handles its moderation from a user's perspective.]]
Reported countlessly by users on the BBB<ref name=":0" />, Trustpilot <ref name=":1" /> and a dedicated subreddit<ref>{{Cite web |title=/r/BannedFromDiscord |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/BannedFromDiscord/}}</ref> users have complained about how Discord's moderation is extremely vague. One such user reported their account being banned from the BBB,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mir |first=Zain |date=Jul 23, 2025 |title=BBB Complaint |url=https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software/discord-inc-1116-918699/complaints?page=2#1116_918699_23643523 |access-date=Aug 1, 2025 |website=Better Business Bureau}}</ref> with an automated system handling the entire process, replying only with templates, without having a human involved in the appeal process.

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Discord]]
[[Category:Forced Arbitration]]

UK Online Safety Act

2025-10-07T12:35:27Z

Overcoat: Updated date formats for consistency. Added Discord wiki link.

{{IncidentCargo
|StartDate=2023-10-26
|Status=Active
|Type=Digital restrictions
|Description=On 26 October 2023, the UK Online Safety Act passed and became law. This act restricts the freedom of UK users of the internet and increases censorship.
|ArticleType=Legislation}}

United Kingdom's [[wikipedia:Online Safety Act 2023|Online Safety Act 2023]] is a set of laws that claims to protect children and adults online.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=April 24, 2025 |title=Online Safety Act: explainer |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer |website=Gov.uk}}</ref> The act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-4 Section 4]).

One of the duties of the act requires affected websites to implement their own solution for identity verification such that it is highly effective to prove one's age ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-12-6 Section 12.6]). There is no official government-sanctioned identity verification platform. Each service provider must implement their own solution or find a third party solution to use to remain compliant. Another duty filters non-verified users from interacting with content made from an "adult user" ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-15-10 Section 15.10])<ref name="rossmann:1">{{Cite web|date=August 1, 2025|last=Rossmann |first=Louis |title=Tea app & UK Online Safety Act - the world is becoming a black mirror episode :(| url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNNsCuEvR5w&t=114 |ref=rossmann:1 |website=[[YouTube]] |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>. These non-verified users will also be less visible, provided the adult user has toggled it.

While the press release says "the measures platforms have to put in place must confirm your age without collecting or storing personal data, unless absolutely necessary,"<ref name=":3">{{Cite news |last=Kyle |first=Peter |date=2025-08-01 |title=Keeping children safe online: changes to the Online Safety Act explained |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/keeping-children-safe-online-changes-to-the-online-safety-act-explained |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Gov.UK}}</ref> the legislation requires that companies track usage by specific people and provide data and/or remote access to Ofcom on demand ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-100 Section 100]) <ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |date=2025-07-25 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50 |journal=UK Public General Acts |volume=2023 |issue=50}}</ref>
Enforcement of this act is done by the UK's Office of Communications (Ofcom). The penalty for breaking these rules is the greater of £18 million and 10% of the person’s qualifying worldwide revenue ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#schedule-13-paragraph-4 Schedule 13.4]).<ref name=":1" />

==Background==
The Online Safety Act is a "Bill to make provision for and in connection with the regulation by Ofcom of certain internet services; for and in connection with communications offences; and for connected purposes."<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-19 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=UK Parliament: Parliamentary Bills}}</ref>

The Online Safety Act received royal assent on 26 October 2023, following five years of work by Carnegie UK, working in concert with over 50 partners. In 2018, Carnegie UK published a series of blogs by William Perrin and Professor Lorna Woods, outlining the proposal for social media regulation.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-09-01 |title=Tackling Online Harms |url=https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241225063325/https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |archive-date=2025-12-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref> The UK Government published its [https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper White Paper] on 8 April 2019, tackling online harm, with a duty of care approach at its core. Carnegie UK ended their work on the Online Safety Act in October 2023.<ref name="online-safety-and-carnegie-uk">{{Cite web |last=Davidson |first=Sarah |date=26 October 2023 |title=Online safety and Carnegie UK |url=https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250701203854/https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-date=2025-07-01 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Kate |date=August 7, 2025| title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship| url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/ |website=Novara Media |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>

The bill was sponsored by Michelle Donelan, the (now former) Conservative MP for Chippenham and Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, a current member of the House of Lords. Both on behalf of the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. <ref name=":4" />

The Online Safety Act is one act in two different stages. The original that reached royal assent on 26 October 2023 under Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, and the amended version in 2025, under Kier Starmer's Labour government. In February 2025, amendments related to making corporations more accountable for the content on their websites, as well as accountability for people accessing inappropriate content were brought to and voted on in parliament. The bill was changed again in May 2025 to include biometric face scans and government ID requirements, which was was not voted on in parliament.

[https://avpassociation.com/ Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA)] was formed in 2018 and is growing rapidly as the age and identity provider industry takes off. It represents all main technology suppliers who have invested in the development of age verification solutions to support the implementation of age restrictions online. <ref>{{Cite web |title=Age Verification Providers Association |url=https://avpassociation.com/}}</ref>

==The impact==
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".

===Spotify===
To view age-restricted content on [[Spotify]], users in the UK are now asked for facial scanning; if that fails, only ID verification can correct the error.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cole |first=Samantha |title=Spotify Is Forcing Users to Undergo Face Scanning to Access Explicit Content |url=https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |access-date=3 August 2025 |work=404 Media |date=30 July 2025 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20250730160610/https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |archive-date=30 July 2025 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===YouTube===
{{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>

===Wikipedia===
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) 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>

===4Chan===
4chan is a simple image-based bulletin board where anyone can post comments and share images.

====Ofcom's investigation====
On 14 April 2025, Ofcom issued a formal information notice to the provider of the service 4chan requesting a copy of the record of its Illegal Content Risk Assessment, as part of the [https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/enforcement-programme-to-monitor-if-services-meet-their-illegal-content-risk-assessment-and-record-keeping-duties-under-the-online-safety-act-2023 Risk Assessment Enforcement Programme]. At the date of opening this investigation, no response has been received to the information notice. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-13 |title=Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users from illegal content |url=https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250615131417/https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-date=2025-06-15 |access-date=2025-08-18 |website=Ofcom}}</ref>

On 10 June 2025, Ofcom opened an investigation into "the online discussion board" 4chan. The investigation will consider 4chan's compliance with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023. Ofcom has powers under [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-102-8 section 102(8)] of the Act to require persons to respond to an information notice in the manner and form specified.

On 13 August 2025, Ofcom, in accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention, believing they had reasonable grounds for believing 4chan has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply (Ofcom.org appears to have blocked Archive.org from this and other pages sometime in July 2025).

====4chan's response====
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>

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>

==Data Breaches==
At least one known data breach has included sensitive ID documents used for age verification since the Online Safety Act came into effect.

===Discord Third-Party Customer Service===
On 3 October 2025, [[Discord]] issued a press release announcing "a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service", 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 third-party in question has not been formally named.

==Consumer response==
According to analysis by Cloudwards, [[Google]] searches for "how to get around age verification" and "is VPN legal in the UK" saw a massive growth of over 450 thousand and 380 thousand percent respectively.<ref name=":5" /> United Kingdom saw an increased VPN usage by 1400 percent.<ref name="UK_VPN">{{Cite web |last=Speed |first=Richard |date=July 28, 2025 |title=UK VPN demand soars after debut of Online Safety Act |url=https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/28/uk_vpn_demand_soars/ |access-date=August 15, 2025 |website=The Register}}</ref> As of 16 August 2025, there has been at least 500 thousand signatures petitioning to repeal the act.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Baynham |first=Alex |date=2025-04-22 |title=Repeal the Online Safety Act |url=https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 |website=Petitions: UK Government and Parliament}}</ref>

===OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk===
[https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/in_memoriam/ OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk] is a website which was created in response to the Act's implementation and is operated by Neil Brown<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk |url=https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/contact/ |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk}}</ref>, a UK tech lawyer ([https://decoded.legal decoded.legal]).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=Neil Brown (@neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk) |url=https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=mastodon.neilzone.co.uk}}</ref> It lists all of the websites affected by the Online Safety Act, with the help of user submissions.

===Use Their ID===
[https://use-their-id.com/ Use Their ID.com] is a parody site that uses publicly available data about UK members of parliament to create AI-generated mock driving licences. They are clearly marked as satire and users are warned not to use them for anything real. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-28 |title=Use Their ID |url=https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730001620/https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-08-17}}</ref>

==Industry expert response==
The act has been [https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/ opposed] as early as December 2023 by Internet Society.

===Electronic Frontier Foundation===
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted an article entitled [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online], and covers the threat to privacy of internet users and how the bill restricts free expression by arbitrating speech online, exposing users to algorithmic discrimination through face checks, and leaves millions of people without a personal device or form ID excluded from accessing the internet.

"The internet must remain a place where all voices can be heard, free from discrimination or censorship by government agencies. If the UK really wants to achieve its goal of being the safest place in the world to go online, it must lead the way in introducing policies that actually protect all users—including children—rather than pushing the enforcement of legislation that harms the very people it was meant to protect."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Collings |first=Paige |date=2025-08-01 |title=No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250812070622/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-date=2025-08-12 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}</ref>

===Theo Browne, YouTuber & CEO at T3 Chat===
[[File:Online Safety Act- Offloading Responsibility. .png|thumb|Parents, government, platforms, identity providers]]Theo posted a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TZozNjPcGw YouTube video] covering the Online Safety Act and how it going to destroy the free internet if the internet community doesn't stop it ASAP. He said it's rare that he gets that extreme about something like this, but believes that it is a really important thing that the community jump in front of.

The Online Safety Act will normalise providing your government-issued identification in order to see content, making everyone more susceptible and vulnerable to phishing attacks perpetrated by identity thieves. The act also shifts the responsibility of child safety to the government, who in turn shift it to the websites, who in turn shift it to a brand new identity and age verification industry.

==Government response==
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>

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>

==See also==

*[[Ofcom]]
*[[Data Protection Act 2018]]
*[[Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom]]
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]

==References==
{{reflist}}


[[Category:Legislation in Europe]]

UK Online Safety Act

2025-10-07T12:30:08Z

Overcoat: Added a section for data breaches related to agre verification data

{{IncidentCargo
|StartDate=2023-10-26
|Status=Active
|Type=Digital restrictions
|Description=On 26 October 2023, the UK Online Safety Act passed and became law. This act restricts the freedom of UK users of the internet and increases censorship.
|ArticleType=Legislation}}

United Kingdom's [[wikipedia:Online Safety Act 2023|Online Safety Act 2023]] is a set of laws that claims to protect children and adults online.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=April 24, 2025 |title=Online Safety Act: explainer |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer |website=Gov.uk}}</ref> The act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-4 Section 4]).

One of the duties of the act requires affected websites to implement their own solution for identity verification such that it is highly effective to prove one's age ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-12-6 Section 12.6]). There is no official government-sanctioned identity verification platform. Each service provider must implement their own solution or find a third party solution to use to remain compliant. Another duty filters non-verified users from interacting with content made from an "adult user" ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-15-10 Section 15.10])<ref name="rossmann:1">{{Cite web|date=August 1, 2025|last=Rossmann |first=Louis |title=Tea app & UK Online Safety Act - the world is becoming a black mirror episode :(| url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNNsCuEvR5w&t=114 |ref=rossmann:1 |website=[[YouTube]] |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>. These non-verified users will also be less visible, provided the adult user has toggled it.

While the press release says "the measures platforms have to put in place must confirm your age without collecting or storing personal data, unless absolutely necessary,"<ref name=":3">{{Cite news |last=Kyle |first=Peter |date=2025-08-01 |title=Keeping children safe online: changes to the Online Safety Act explained |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/keeping-children-safe-online-changes-to-the-online-safety-act-explained |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Gov.UK}}</ref> the legislation requires that companies track usage by specific people and provide data and/or remote access to Ofcom on demand ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-100 Section 100]) <ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |date=2025-07-25 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50 |journal=UK Public General Acts |volume=2023 |issue=50}}</ref>
Enforcement of this act is done by the UK's Office of Communications (Ofcom). The penalty for breaking these rules is the greater of £18 million and 10% of the person’s qualifying worldwide revenue ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#schedule-13-paragraph-4 Schedule 13.4]).<ref name=":1" />

==Background==
The Online Safety Act is a "Bill to make provision for and in connection with the regulation by Ofcom of certain internet services; for and in connection with communications offences; and for connected purposes."<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-19 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=UK Parliament: Parliamentary Bills}}</ref>

The Online Safety Act received royal assent on 26 October 2023, following five years of work by Carnegie UK, working in concert with over 50 partners. In 2018, Carnegie UK published a series of blogs by William Perrin and Professor Lorna Woods, outlining the proposal for social media regulation.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-09-01 |title=Tackling Online Harms |url=https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241225063325/https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |archive-date=2025-12-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref> The UK Government published its [https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper White Paper] on 8 April 2019, tackling online harm, with a duty of care approach at its core. Carnegie UK ended their work on the Online Safety Act in October 2023.<ref name="online-safety-and-carnegie-uk">{{Cite web |last=Davidson |first=Sarah |date=26 October 2023 |title=Online safety and Carnegie UK |url=https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250701203854/https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-date=2025-07-01 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Kate |date=August 7, 2025| title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship| url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/ |website=Novara Media |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>

The bill was sponsored by Michelle Donelan, the (now former) Conservative MP for Chippenham and Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, a current member of the House of Lords. Both on behalf of the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. <ref name=":4" />

The Online Safety Act is one act in two different stages. The original that reached royal assent on 26 October 2023 under Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, and the amended version in 2025, under Kier Starmer's Labour government. In February 2025, amendments related to making corporations more accountable for the content on their websites, as well as accountability for people accessing inappropriate content were brought to and voted on in parliament. The bill was changed again in May 2025 to include biometric face scans and government ID requirements, which was was not voted on in parliament.

[https://avpassociation.com/ Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA)] was formed in 2018 and is growing rapidly as the age and identity provider industry takes off. It represents all main technology suppliers who have invested in the development of age verification solutions to support the implementation of age restrictions online. <ref>{{Cite web |title=Age Verification Providers Association |url=https://avpassociation.com/}}</ref>

==The impact==
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".

===Spotify===
To view age-restricted content on [[Spotify]], users in the UK are now asked for facial scanning; if that fails, only ID verification can correct the error.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cole |first=Samantha |title=Spotify Is Forcing Users to Undergo Face Scanning to Access Explicit Content |url=https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |access-date=3 August 2025 |work=404 Media |date=30 July 2025 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20250730160610/https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |archive-date=30 July 2025 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===YouTube===
{{Main|Youtubes Requirement for Government ID}}
On July 30, 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>

===Wikipedia===
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) 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 August 11, 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>

===4Chan===
4chan is a simple image-based bulletin board where anyone can post comments and share images.

====Ofcom's investigation====
On 14 April 2025, Ofcom issued a formal information notice to the provider of the service 4chan requesting a copy of the record of its Illegal Content Risk Assessment, as part of the [https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/enforcement-programme-to-monitor-if-services-meet-their-illegal-content-risk-assessment-and-record-keeping-duties-under-the-online-safety-act-2023 Risk Assessment Enforcement Programme]. At the date of opening this investigation, no response has been received to the information notice. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-13 |title=Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users from illegal content |url=https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250615131417/https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-date=2025-06-15 |access-date=2025-08-18 |website=Ofcom}}</ref>

On 10 June 2025, Ofcom opened an investigation into "the online discussion board" 4chan. The investigation will consider 4chan's compliance with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023. Ofcom has powers under [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-102-8 section 102(8)] of the Act to require persons to respond to an information notice in the manner and form specified.

On 13 August 2025, Ofcom, in accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention, believing they had reasonable grounds for believing 4chan has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply (Ofcom.org appears to have blocked Archive.org from this and other pages sometime in July 2025).

====4chan's response====
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>

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>

== Data Breaches ==
At least one known data breach has included sensitive ID documents used for age verification since the Online Safety Act came into effect.

=== Discord Third-Party Customer Service ===
On 3 October 2025, Discord issued a press release announcing "a Security Incident Involving Third-Party Customer Service", 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 third-party in question has not been formally named.

==Consumer response==
According to analysis by Cloudwards, [[Google]] searches for "how to get around age verification" and "is VPN legal in the UK" saw a massive growth of over 450 thousand and 380 thousand percent respectively.<ref name=":5" /> United Kingdom saw an increased VPN usage by 1400 percent.<ref name="UK_VPN">{{Cite web |last=Speed |first=Richard |date=July 28, 2025 |title=UK VPN demand soars after debut of Online Safety Act |url=https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/28/uk_vpn_demand_soars/ |access-date=August 15, 2025 |website=The Register}}</ref> As of August 16, 2025, there has been at least 500 thousand signatures petitioning to repeal the act.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Baynham |first=Alex |date=2025-04-22 |title=Repeal the Online Safety Act |url=https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 |website=Petitions: UK Government and Parliament}}</ref>

===OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk===
[https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/in_memoriam/ OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk] is a website which was created in response to the Act's implementation and is operated by Neil Brown<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk |url=https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/contact/ |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk}}</ref>, a UK tech lawyer ([https://decoded.legal decoded.legal]).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=Neil Brown (@neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk) |url=https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=mastodon.neilzone.co.uk}}</ref> It lists all of the websites affected by the Online Safety Act, with the help of user submissions.

===Use Their ID===
[https://use-their-id.com/ Use Their ID.com] is a parody site that uses publicly available data about UK members of parliament to create AI-generated mock driving licences. They are clearly marked as satire and users are warned not to use them for anything real. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-28 |title=Use Their ID |url=https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730001620/https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-08-17}}</ref>

==Industry expert response==
The act has been [https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/ opposed] as early as December 2023 by Internet Society.

===Electronic Frontier Foundation===
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted an article entitled [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online], and covers the threat to privacy of internet users and how the bill restricts free expression by arbitrating speech online, exposing users to algorithmic discrimination through face checks, and leaves millions of people without a personal device or form ID excluded from accessing the internet.

"The internet must remain a place where all voices can be heard, free from discrimination or censorship by government agencies. If the UK really wants to achieve its goal of being the safest place in the world to go online, it must lead the way in introducing policies that actually protect all users—including children—rather than pushing the enforcement of legislation that harms the very people it was meant to protect."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Collings |first=Paige |date=2025-08-01 |title=No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250812070622/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-date=2025-08-12 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}</ref>

===Theo Browne, YouTuber & CEO at T3 Chat===
[[File:Online Safety Act- Offloading Responsibility. .png|thumb|Parents, government, platforms, identity providers]]Theo posted a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TZozNjPcGw YouTube video] covering the Online Safety Act and how it going to destroy the free internet if the internet community doesn't stop it ASAP. He said it's rare that he gets that extreme about something like this, but believes that it is a really important thing that the community jump in front of.

The Online Safety Act will normalise providing your government-issued identification in order to see content, making everyone more susceptible and vulnerable to phishing attacks perpetrated by identity thieves. The act also shifts the responsibility of child safety to the government, who in turn shift it to the websites, who in turn shift it to a brand new identity and age verification industry.

==Government response==
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>

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>

==See also==

*[[Ofcom]]
*[[Data Protection Act 2018]]
*[[Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom]]
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]

==References==
{{reflist}}


[[Category:Legislation in Europe]]

UK Online Safety Act

2025-10-07T11:45:27Z

Overcoat: Fixed OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk header typo

{{IncidentCargo
|StartDate=2023-10-26
|Status=Active
|Type=Digital restrictions
|Description=On 26 October 2023, the UK Online Safety Act passed and became law. This act restricts the freedom of UK users of the internet and increases censorship.
|ArticleType=Legislation}}

United Kingdom's [[wikipedia:Online Safety Act 2023|Online Safety Act 2023]] is a set of laws that claims to protect children and adults online.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=April 24, 2025 |title=Online Safety Act: explainer |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer |website=Gov.uk}}</ref> The act applies to search services and services that allow users to post content online or to interact with each other ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-4 Section 4]).

One of the duties of the act requires affected websites to implement their own solution for identity verification such that it is highly effective to prove one's age ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-12-6 Section 12.6]). There is no official government-sanctioned identity verification platform. Each service provider must implement their own solution or find a third party solution to use to remain compliant. Another duty filters non-verified users from interacting with content made from an "adult user" ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-15-10 Section 15.10])<ref name="rossmann:1">{{Cite web|date=August 1, 2025|last=Rossmann |first=Louis |title=Tea app & UK Online Safety Act - the world is becoming a black mirror episode :(| url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNNsCuEvR5w&t=114 |ref=rossmann:1 |website=[[YouTube]] |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>. These non-verified users will also be less visible, provided the adult user has toggled it.

While the press release says "the measures platforms have to put in place must confirm your age without collecting or storing personal data, unless absolutely necessary,"<ref name=":3">{{Cite news |last=Kyle |first=Peter |date=2025-08-01 |title=Keeping children safe online: changes to the Online Safety Act explained |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/keeping-children-safe-online-changes-to-the-online-safety-act-explained |access-date=2025-08-16 |work=Gov.UK}}</ref> the legislation requires that companies track usage by specific people and provide data and/or remote access to Ofcom on demand ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-100 Section 100]) <ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |date=2025-07-25 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50 |journal=UK Public General Acts |volume=2023 |issue=50}}</ref>
Enforcement of this act is done by the UK's Office of Communications (Ofcom). The penalty for breaking these rules is the greater of £18 million and 10% of the person’s qualifying worldwide revenue ([https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#schedule-13-paragraph-4 Schedule 13.4]).<ref name=":1" />

==Background==
The Online Safety Act is a "Bill to make provision for and in connection with the regulation by Ofcom of certain internet services; for and in connection with communications offences; and for connected purposes."<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |date=2024-08-19 |title=Online Safety Act 2023 |url=https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=UK Parliament: Parliamentary Bills}}</ref>

The Online Safety Act received royal assent on 26 October 2023, following five years of work by Carnegie UK, working in concert with over 50 partners. In 2018, Carnegie UK published a series of blogs by William Perrin and Professor Lorna Woods, outlining the proposal for social media regulation.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25-09-01 |title=Tackling Online Harms |url=https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241225063325/https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/ |archive-date=2025-12-25 |access-date=2025-09-01 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref> The UK Government published its [https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper White Paper] on 8 April 2019, tackling online harm, with a duty of care approach at its core. Carnegie UK ended their work on the Online Safety Act in October 2023.<ref name="online-safety-and-carnegie-uk">{{Cite web |last=Davidson |first=Sarah |date=26 October 2023 |title=Online safety and Carnegie UK |url=https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250701203854/https://carnegieuk.org/blog/online-safety-and-carnegie-uk/ |archive-date=2025-07-01 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Carnegie UK}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Kate |date=August 7, 2025| title=The Online Safety Act Has Nothing to Do With Child Safety and Everything to Do With Censorship| url=https://novaramedia.com/2025/08/07/the-online-safety-act-has-nothing-to-do-with-child-safety-and-everything-to-do-with-censorship/ |website=Novara Media |access-date=August 25, 2025}}</ref>

The bill was sponsored by Michelle Donelan, the (now former) Conservative MP for Chippenham and Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, a current member of the House of Lords. Both on behalf of the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. <ref name=":4" />

The Online Safety Act is one act in two different stages. The original that reached royal assent on 26 October 2023 under Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, and the amended version in 2025, under Kier Starmer's Labour government. In February 2025, amendments related to making corporations more accountable for the content on their websites, as well as accountability for people accessing inappropriate content were brought to and voted on in parliament. The bill was changed again in May 2025 to include biometric face scans and government ID requirements, which was was not voted on in parliament.

[https://avpassociation.com/ Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA)] was formed in 2018 and is growing rapidly as the age and identity provider industry takes off. It represents all main technology suppliers who have invested in the development of age verification solutions to support the implementation of age restrictions online. <ref>{{Cite web |title=Age Verification Providers Association |url=https://avpassociation.com/}}</ref>

==The impact==
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".

===Spotify===
To view age-restricted content on [[Spotify]], users in the UK are now asked for facial scanning; if that fails, only ID verification can correct the error.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cole |first=Samantha |title=Spotify Is Forcing Users to Undergo Face Scanning to Access Explicit Content |url=https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |access-date=3 August 2025 |work=404 Media |date=30 July 2025 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20250730160610/https://www.404media.co/spotify-uk-age-check-verification-yoti/ |archive-date=30 July 2025 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===YouTube===
{{Main|Youtubes Requirement for Government ID}}
On July 30, 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>

===Wikipedia===
The [[Wikimedia Foundation]] (WMF) 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 August 11, 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>

===4Chan===
4chan is a simple image-based bulletin board where anyone can post comments and share images.

====Ofcom's investigation====
On 14 April 2025, Ofcom issued a formal information notice to the provider of the service 4chan requesting a copy of the record of its Illegal Content Risk Assessment, as part of the [https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/enforcement-programme-to-monitor-if-services-meet-their-illegal-content-risk-assessment-and-record-keeping-duties-under-the-online-safety-act-2023 Risk Assessment Enforcement Programme]. At the date of opening this investigation, no response has been received to the information notice. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-13 |title=Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users from illegal content |url=https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250615131417/https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/investigation-into-4chan-and-its-compliance-with-duties-to-protect-its-users-from-illegal-content |archive-date=2025-06-15 |access-date=2025-08-18 |website=Ofcom}}</ref>

On 10 June 2025, Ofcom opened an investigation into "the online discussion board" 4chan. The investigation will consider 4chan's compliance with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023. Ofcom has powers under [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50#section-102-8 section 102(8)] of the Act to require persons to respond to an information notice in the manner and form specified.

On 13 August 2025, Ofcom, in accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention, believing they had reasonable grounds for believing 4chan has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply (Ofcom.org appears to have blocked Archive.org from this and other pages sometime in July 2025).

====4chan's response====
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>

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>

==Consumer response==
According to analysis by Cloudwards, [[Google]] searches for "how to get around age verification" and "is VPN legal in the UK" saw a massive growth of over 450 thousand and 380 thousand percent respectively.<ref name=":5" /> United Kingdom saw an increased VPN usage by 1400 percent.<ref name="UK_VPN">{{Cite web |last=Speed |first=Richard |date=July 28, 2025 |title=UK VPN demand soars after debut of Online Safety Act |url=https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/28/uk_vpn_demand_soars/ |access-date=August 15, 2025 |website=The Register}}</ref> As of August 16, 2025, there has been at least 500 thousand signatures petitioning to repeal the act.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Baynham |first=Alex |date=2025-04-22 |title=Repeal the Online Safety Act |url=https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 |website=Petitions: UK Government and Parliament}}</ref>

===OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk===
[https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/in_memoriam/ OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk] is a website which was created in response to the Act's implementation and is operated by Neil Brown<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk |url=https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/contact/ |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk}}</ref>, a UK tech lawyer ([https://decoded.legal decoded.legal]).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brown |first=Neil |title=Neil Brown (@neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk) |url=https://mastodon.neilzone.co.uk/@neil |access-date=2025-08-16 |website=mastodon.neilzone.co.uk}}</ref> It lists all of the websites affected by the Online Safety Act, with the help of user submissions.

===Use Their ID===
[https://use-their-id.com/ Use Their ID.com] is a parody site that uses publicly available data about UK members of parliament to create AI-generated mock driving licences. They are clearly marked as satire and users are warned not to use them for anything real. <ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-28 |title=Use Their ID |url=https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730001620/https://use-their-id.com/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-08-17}}</ref>

==Industry expert response==
The act has been [https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/internet-fragmentation/uk-online-safety-act/ opposed] as early as December 2023 by Internet Society.

===Electronic Frontier Foundation===
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted an article entitled [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online], and covers the threat to privacy of internet users and how the bill restricts free expression by arbitrating speech online, exposing users to algorithmic discrimination through face checks, and leaves millions of people without a personal device or form ID excluded from accessing the internet.

"The internet must remain a place where all voices can be heard, free from discrimination or censorship by government agencies. If the UK really wants to achieve its goal of being the safest place in the world to go online, it must lead the way in introducing policies that actually protect all users—including children—rather than pushing the enforcement of legislation that harms the very people it was meant to protect."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Collings |first=Paige |date=2025-08-01 |title=No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250812070622/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/08/no-uks-online-safety-act-doesnt-make-children-safer-online |archive-date=2025-08-12 |access-date=2025-08-17 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}</ref>

===Theo Browne, YouTuber & CEO at T3 Chat===
[[File:Online Safety Act- Offloading Responsibility. .png|thumb|Parents, government, platforms, identity providers]]Theo posted a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TZozNjPcGw YouTube video] covering the Online Safety Act and how it going to destroy the free internet if the internet community doesn't stop it ASAP. He said it's rare that he gets that extreme about something like this, but believes that it is a really important thing that the community jump in front of.

The Online Safety Act will normalise providing your government-issued identification in order to see content, making everyone more susceptible and vulnerable to phishing attacks perpetrated by identity thieves. The act also shifts the responsibility of child safety to the government, who in turn shift it to the websites, who in turn shift it to a brand new identity and age verification industry.

==Government response==
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>

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>

==See also==

*[[Ofcom]]
*[[Data Protection Act 2018]]
*[[Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom]]
*[[General Data Protection Regulation]]

==References==
{{reflist}}


[[Category:Legislation in Europe]]