Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship United Kingdom Government The Courts The Internet

UK Proposes Mandatory Age Verification For Porn Sites (mirror.co.uk) 146

A proposed bill read in the House of Commons, "suggests that by next year websites will require visitors to prove they are of legal age before entering..." reports the Mirror. Britain's prime minister "says none of Britain's top 10 porn sites -- which account for 52% of all views -- have a 'robust' process to verify users' age," citing figures that 10% of the site's viewers are below the age of 18. The Independent adds that "the issue has alarmed privacy campaigners, since it could mean having to register a credit card with a porn website." U.K. lawyer Neil Brown contacted Slashdot with more on the age-verification requirement: Sites which failed to do so could face fines of up to 250,000 pounds or 5% of annual turnover. Their URLs could also be given to ISPs and payment processing providers, to consider voluntary blocking/service suspension, although no mandatory blocking regime is planned currently.
This is the same bill that proposes jail terms up to 10 years for those found guilty of copyright infringement. According to the article, one 2013 study found that 7% of the world's porn was hosted in the UK, with 60% in America and 26% in the Netherlands.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Proposes Mandatory Age Verification For Porn Sites

Comments Filter:
  • Sinking Ship (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 10, 2016 @03:42AM (#52481651)

    Great, another reason for businesses to abandon the sinking ship that is the UK economy.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 10, 2016 @03:42AM (#52481653)

    Unless I'm missing something, how exactly do they plan to enforce this for overseas sites?

    Or is this going to end up with some braindead ISP filter saying: "I see you're trying to access a porn site, I've logged that for you, now confirm who you are so I can log that too (under the guise of letting you have access once verified)"

    Privacy invasion, much.

    It's the job of the parents to control access to the internet from their house, not the state. If the state has to do this, then perhaps the parents should be held more responsible?

    • by Feral Nerd ( 3929873 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @04:58AM (#52481807)

      Unless I'm missing something, how exactly do they plan to enforce this for overseas sites?

      Or is this going to end up with some braindead ISP filter saying: "I see you're trying to access a porn site, I've logged that for you, now confirm who you are so I can log that too (under the guise of letting you have access once verified)"

      Privacy invasion, much.

      It's the job of the parents to control access to the internet from their house, not the state. If the state has to do this, then perhaps the parents should be held more responsible?

      I find it amusing how conservatives, who are usually the most energetic at raging against regulations and the mommy state, are the most eager to impose mountains of regulations, draconian censorship and generally the mommy state on the public in order to regulate other people's sexual behaviour. In fact it is downright creepy how obsessed they are over who other people might be having sex with in the privacy of their bedrooms and how they are doing it, or in this case what they are using their laptops or tablet computers and tissue dispensers for in the privacy of their bedrooms.

      • by Zaelath ( 2588189 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @07:55AM (#52482165)

        Yeah, where's the verification bill requiring that car companies prove people have a driver's licence before operating their vehicles? One of these leads to wanking, the other leads to death....

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Yeah, where's the verification bill requiring that car companies prove people have a driver's licence before operating their vehicles? One of these leads to wanking, the other leads to death....

          I've yet to see a dealer not demand to see your license, and make a copy of it, before letting you get into a car.

          Also your insurance, the last few I've got have checked that too, and told me I needed to check with the insurance company.

          And I think, but I'm not sure, but they also had to tell me to go register my vehicle.

          • I've yet to see a dealer not demand to see your license, and make a copy of it, before letting you get into a car.
            Also your insurance, the last few I've got have checked that too, and told me I needed to check with the insurance company.
            And I think, but I'm not sure, but they also had to tell me to go register my vehicle.

            License, yes. Insurance, you can just call your insurance company while you're there and tell them you've done it and they go "okay!" Registration, yes, and they usually file it for you.

          • The dealer yes, how is he the car company? The ISP knows you're an adult, they have a signed contract with you, like the dealer does. I never signed anything with Mazda for my last car.

            Is this some strange American thing where all the cars are owned by the car company and you only purchase the right to use them?

      • by swb ( 14022 )

        The mistake we make is in judging political entities by the liberties they endorse.

        Instead we should recognize that all political entities believe in regulating the behaviors they believe are counter-productive to their world view or they believe prevent achieving their goals.

      • by teg ( 97890 )

        I find it amusing how conservatives, who are usually the most energetic at raging against regulations and the mommy state, are the most eager to impose mountains of regulations, draconian censorship and generally the mommy state on the public in order to regulate other people's sexual behaviour. I

        This goes for conservatives (Republicans) in the US as well. They're against regulation of businesses, but they sure are happy about regulating people's personal life..

    • Responsible parents could arguably control Internet access for their children from their house, but not so easily from e.g. WiFi hotspots or libraries.
      • by dryeo ( 100693 )

        My libraries WiFi and desktops seem to be pretty locked down. Never tried to access porn there but I did get kicked off for trying to upload a zip file to a ftp site.

    • by GNious ( 953874 )

      Unless I'm missing something, how exactly do they plan to enforce this for overseas sites?

      /quote>

      Use their position in the EU to enforce it against the 26% of porn hosted in the Netherlands, as well as other locations in the EU.... oh, wait ....

  • Good luck with that. I'm sure the whole world of waiting to comply.
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @04:12AM (#52481723)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • how does this work?

      Like every other bit of political rhetoric. You appeal to peoples' antipathy, and they vote for you.

    • every time i see some weird killswitch legislation proposed in the UK im boggled as to how this gets implemented...

      How it's implemented? Very simple: not.

      That's anyway not the job of politicians. They only decide what has to be done. Not how it has to be done.

      • by gilgongo ( 57446 )

        "They only decide what has to be done. Not how it has to be done."

        It's getting worse than that in fact. In many cases, politicians seem to know their policies can't in fact be executed, but they don't really care. This is because the simple act of pushing for legislation (enacted or not) is enough to do the job of getting people to vote for them. It's like the Trump Wall: there is no way that Trump and his team actually think they'll be able to build the wall. They just know that all they have to do is be s

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      It's not exactly rocket science how this would work, same way you can't buy porn mags or go to strip clubs and just say you're over 18. Today there are tons of sites that will show hardcore porn to any teenager willing so say "suuuuuure I'm 18+". Like first time you go to brazzers.com:

      This website contains age-restricted materials. If you are under the age of 18 years, or under the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website you do not have authorization or permission to enter this website or access any of its materials. If you are over the age of 18 years or over the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website by entering the website you hereby agree to comply with all the TERMS AND CONDITIONS. You also acknowledge and agree that you are not offended by nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity. By clicking on the "Enter" button, and by entering this website you agree with all the above and certify under penalty of perjury that you are an adult.

      Click enter and they'll show you porn. Previews, to make you sign up but more than enough for curious teenagers. And the warning is all just scary talk since minors can't enter contracts and nothing is "under penalty of perjur

      • Pornography is something of an impulse decision: When you want it, you want it now. Spending ten minutes messing around with an age verification system is going to drive away most customers, who will simply go to one of the many, many non-UK-operated porn sites. Complying with this proposal renders a site commercially unsustainable.

    • Yes. All of the above, and yet I'm still able to access The Pirate Bay from the UK. Seriously this one site alone is an example of how blocking schemes don't work.

  • Use a proxy, claim to be from X which doesn't require this. Problem solved.

    Am I missing something? Serious question...

    • Yes.

      The other 99%: "what's a proxy?"

      • Re:Proxies anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by quenda ( 644621 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @05:55AM (#52481903)

        Yes.

        The other 99%: "what's a proxy?"

        The 80%: "oh, you mean that thingamajig my friend / neighbour / youtube-video-instructions did to my internet connection so I could watch US-Netflix / pirate movies / porn ?"

      • I work at a school. Every now and then, a new game site is suddenly cropping up on our monitoring - usually being played by five students at once, until we block it. Word travels very quickly. From discovery to common knowledge in a day. I don't see why unblocked porn sites would be any different.

        Somewhat surprisingly, we very rarely find anyone trying to look for porn. I can only assume no-one wants to look at porn in school, where there is no privacy and lots of people potentially peeking.

  • Priorities (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wowsers ( 1151731 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @04:29AM (#52481753) Journal

    It's sick how the politicians are using their usual excuse of "think of the children" to attack the free internet via porn, while they let paedophile (pedophile) gangs roam UK's treats for decades, even police and social services helping these gangs commit their crimes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    But just as bad, while politicians have a fetish over banning porn, they have no problem having 24/7 violence on TV. How many people are killed with sex, and how many people killed because TV gives impression to people that violence is ok?

    It's all a smokescreen to control the internet, most people too stupid to see it, they are just fixated on the control porn argument.

    • I'm not so sure it's a smokescreen in this case. Some people genuinely believe that they have to do something "for the children" and that stuff like this is both beneficial and effective.

      I think whenever a politicial proposes a new law that limits what we can and cannot do, other politicians (MPs, lords, senators, congressman or what have you) should ask a few simple questions before even considering the law, and journalists should keep asking until they get a satisfactory answer:
      - What problem are you
      • by umghhh ( 965931 )

        This should apply to any law. Similar to actual process leading to any action in a group - decide if there is a problem, what the reasons are, how to fix it, decide on a solution and verify the effects, repeat if need be.

        There is a problem with this tho, more than one actually. When such method is deployed you need some sort of agreement on the deployment or else those that disagree just boycott the groups' decisions. The other is lobby work - clear statement of goal will show who our heroes sold themselve

      • by gilgongo ( 57446 )

        "with an automatic repeal in case success is not achieved or evaluated"

        While I think that's actually a pretty good idea (and see also the discussions about randomised control trials in social policy), but it may lead to a "ratchet effect" occurring. This is because, basically, the only thing elected officials can do is legislate in reaction to anything. Something bad happens? Pass a law to ban it.

        So if a law doesn't have the desired effect, it may well be seen to have been too mild. Kids still viewing porn

        • That's a good point, and this rule doesn't guarantee that no more disproportional or ineffective laws are passed. What needs to change is the mindset with politicians and the public, and this rule is meant to foster that change.

          The automatic repeal goes hand in hand with those questions: additional stricter measures would increasingly fail the question of proportionality.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      If implemented it would create a tsunami of credit card fraud. Training users to enter their card details as authentication for porn sites is incredibly stupid and dangerous.

  • by Going_Digital ( 1485615 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @04:36AM (#52481769)
    Perhaps if David Cameron had internet porn he would have known that there are better places to put your manhood than a pigs head.
  • by Feral Nerd ( 3929873 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @04:43AM (#52481781)

    Britain's prime minister "says none of Britain's top 10 porn sites -- which account for 52% of all views...

    Ok... lost me right there... where can I find that list?

  • As the Brexit poll showed a few days ago, there is a large percentage of any population that is completely out of touch with reality, and this proposal is no different. Such scare tactics basically pander to the lowest-common-denominator voters out there, giving them yet another feel-good measure that accomplishes nothing much besides giving everyone else a headache. Because it clearly is something that any rational person would conclude cannot be properly carried out unless those who are asking for it do n
  • Having websites act as parents isn't an efficient solution. Teach parents how to use decent parental control software and about the importance to monitoring what their children do online (not just porn) would be far more effective.

    This issue will probably get less over time as the current generation of internet and computer illiterate parents are gradually replaced by the next generation that grew up with the internet and won't need a state sponsored course in this.To be honest I think one of the bigger iss

  • If you're ashamed to do it then don't do it Or fully live your shame.
  • America #1 (Score:4, Funny)

    by penguinoid ( 724646 ) on Sunday July 10, 2016 @06:59AM (#52482045) Homepage Journal

    study found that 60% of the world's porn was hosted in America

    I knew America was still number 1 at something.

  • give credit card details to a porn site,
    you're pulling my dick!

  • Rather than requiring foreign sites to adapt, the ISP level porn blockers could be adapted to do this: require an account's owner be age verified. How you separate access from an authorised machine at a home address from one which is not is another matter, but I doubt it's that hard. My worry is that this is more of a political stunt to win votes from conservative votes with tradition-derived anti-sex attitudes, and to try and win the religous vote to the Tories away from Labour: compassion and care for the

  • Seriously, what the hell is this supposed to do, aside of pretty much kill the only industry in Britain that's not been hit by the Brexit already? Nobody outside the Isle of Splendid Isolation gives halve a fuck about their laws, so the only thing this will affect is that porn providers outside GB will cater to British tastes more in an attempt to attract Brits as customers.

    And of course any and all porn in Britain will do what the rest of the industry already does: Pack up and leave.

  • Apparently no politician anywhere on the planet understands even basic technology, let alone how the internet works. You can't dictate things like this to websites that are owned and wholly hosted outside the borders of your country. Therefore your 'morality legislation', like all 'morality legislation', falls flat on it's face right out of the gate. Even China's 'great firewall' isn't 100% effective and opens the door to all sorts of abuse of it's abilities.

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again: at t
    • I've said it before, and I'll say it again: at the rate things are going, we're going to end up with NO internet at all, only 'walled gardens' within national borders, that are utterly useless for anything serious due to lack of connectivity and too many controls, along with a useless substitute for actual encryption.

      Remember, telecommunications companies are people too. For once, corporate control of so many governments worldwide will work in our favor. They can't actually cut the cables. The telcos make too much money off of them to allow that. At best, they'll all buy Great Firewalls, and the rest of the world's population will catch up with the general Chinese population, who are already adept at tunneling through the Great Firewall.

      The average 3 felonies per day that everyone already commits will rise to 4 and

  • It is really good to see that the Tories, having fixed that pesky EU brexit problem, have moved on to the next important issue already.

    It just shows what they are really after - now, with the EU regulations possibly out of the window, they can get rid of stupid commie crap like worker protections, human rights or privacy protections. Let's do everything to make the rich even richer and screw everyone else.

  • I assume using someone else's credit card without authorization is a crime in Great Britain.

    If it's not, well, nevermind then.

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Working...