House Passes KIDS Act, Sparking Privacy and Free Speech Concerns

Key facts

• The House passed the Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act and other online safety bills.
• The legislation aims to protect children online by requiring new safety features, parental controls, and restricting data use for targeted advertising.
• Critics warn the bills could threaten privacy and free expression through measures like age verification.
• The House package omits a "duty of care" requirement present in the Senate's Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).
• Digital rights groups and tech industry lobbyists have raised concerns about the potential impact on anonymous speech and the open internet.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bipartisan package of children's online safety legislation, including the Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act, by a vote of 267-117. Supporters champion the bills as a crucial step toward creating a safer online environment for children, enhancing parental controls, and holding major technology companies accountable. The legislation mandates new safety features on online platforms, restricts the use of minors' data for targeted advertising, and requires age verification for websites featuring pornography.

However, the package has drawn significant criticism from privacy advocates and digital rights organizations. Groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation argue that implementing age-gating mechanisms could inadvertently chill anonymous speech and affect all internet users, not just children. They express concern over the complexity and legal risks associated with various age-verification schemes. The tech industry lobbying group NetChoice echoed these sentiments, stating that the bills undermine privacy, security, and First Amendment protections.

Further complicating the legislative path, the House package notably omits a "duty of care" requirement that was a key provision in the Senate's previously approved Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). Senator Maria Cantwell criticized this omission, suggesting it weakens the overall protections for children. Tech and free speech lawyer Preston Byrne has also voiced skepticism regarding the likelihood of any such legislation ultimately passing.