The report singles out the U.K.’s OSA for criticism, claiming the rules “expressly expanded Ofcom’s authority to include American media and technology firms with a substantial number of British users, regardless of whether they had a corporate presence in the UK.”
Since a key provision requiring children be restricted from accessing content deemed harmful came into force in July, leading platforms to carry out widespread age checks, digital rights groups including Open Rights Group and Big Brother Watch raised privacy and freedom of speech concerns.
However, parts of the U.S. report mischaracterize the U.K.’s online safety laws. It claims the communications watchdog, Ofcom, is authorized by the act to “monitor all forms of communication” for illegal speech, which is not the case. The OSA also does not enable the regulator or the government to direct the removal of specific items of content.
Instead — as the report later outlines correctly — service providers have a more general obligation to prevent users from encountering such content, while protecting their right to freedom of expression.
An Ofcom spokesperson said: “Our role is to enforce the Online Safety Act, which requires tech firms to have systems and processes in place to tackle criminal content – including fraud, child sex abuse material and terrorism – and prevent children from seeing the content most harmful to them – pornography, and suicide, self-harm and eating disorder content. ”
“There is no requirement on sites to restrict legal content for adult users. In fact, they must carefully consider how they protect users’ rights to freedom of expression while keeping people safe, ” they added.
