Governments are increasingly turning to age verification to try to restrict access to certain types of content on the Internet. Many such laws may be well-intentioned with the aim to prevent exposing children to adult content. But mandating the use of age verification technologies will not provide an effective solution and will create a false sense of security. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even more troubling, such laws would introduce accessibility, privacy, and security risks for users of all ages. They would also have a chilling effect on everyday Internet use to access health and entertainment content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On Friday, 20 September 2024, we joined an amicus brief led by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and also signed by New America\u2019s Open Technology Institute (OTI) and professors Daniel Weitzner, Eran Tromer, and Sarah Scheffler. The brief was filed before the US Supreme Court in the case Free Speech Coalition, Inc. et al. v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2023, the state of Texas passed a law, HB 1181<\/a>, that would require websites with more than one-third of content that is \u201csexual material harmful to minors\u201d to use \u201creasonable age verification methods\u201d to verify that an individual attempting to access the material is of 18 years or older. A district court struck down the law’s age verification provisions as an unconstitutional burden on the ability of adults to access lawful content. However, the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling. Parties then applied to the US Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Our concern is that if the US Supreme Court upholds this law, not only will people in Texas have an unsafe online experience, but other US states may seek to copy this law, and soon, people across the US will be less safe online. Additionally, other countries may follow the example of Texas, and Internet users all around the world will be less secure.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Age verification technologies are already in use on the Internet. But that doesn\u2019t make them safe, secure, or effective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the joint amicus brief<\/a> filed on Friday, we outline the practical challenges of using the current range of technologies available for age verification. The brief describes five categories of existing age verification technologies that could be used to comply with HB 1181:<\/p>\n\n\n\n We explain how they are often ineffective at accurately identifying an individual\u2019s age and can be circumvented by minors. We also highlight how individuals may be excluded from age verification schemes because they do not have government-issued IDs or credit cards. We also address the significant privacy and security risks to all users, including minors, and the effect that age verification will have on adults\u2019 access to content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Apart from the practical challenges of age verification technologies and their privacy and security risks, users may be less willing to access content that requires age verification, fearing that their activity could be monitored.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Adult users who want to access content may also find their access is hindered because it is too challenging to use. For instance, adermatoglyphia<\/a> (loss of fingerprints), \u201ccataracts, stroke, congestive heart failure, hard veins, and other ailments<\/a>\u201d may prevent older Americans from being able to successfully use age verification schemes based on biometrics and facial scans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even the narrowest use of mandatory age verification is vulnerable to being expanded and could easily spread to other types of content. Further, if more and more countries start adding mandatory age verification requirements for different ages and different services, a conflicting patchwork of restricted access will emerge and disrupt the seamless, interoperable nature of the Internet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now\u2026we wait. The Supreme Court will hear the case during their 2024-2025 term, but no date has yet been set for oral arguments. You can join us in watching the Supreme Court\u2019s site in the months ahead<\/a> to see when the next phase begins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We hope our joint amicus brief will inform the Supreme Court of the significant challenges today posed by age verification technologies, which means that requiring their use under HB 1181 would not effectively protect children from harmful material, and would undermine the security and privacy of all Internet users, including both adults and minors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the meantime, there is important work to be done to improve the security, privacy, and accessibility of age verification systems that are already in use, and to protect children\u2019s personal interactions with end-to-end encryption<\/a> and strong privacy standards.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Challenge of Age Verification<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
The Risks of Mandatory Age Verification<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Next Steps<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Learn more about our Amicus Program<\/a> where we seek to give the Internet a voice in the courts.\u202f <\/h5>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n