Re: Online Safety Bill
 

There will not be any court cases, it's all advisory

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Frankly the only notice l take of it is via here .

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Take notice of what:shrug:

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Here's a clue .....look at the title:D

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

No, it's not. Just because Ofcom has issued guidance to help website owners stay on the right side of the law, doesn't mean that enforcement action won't be taken for non compliance.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

What waste of money that will be:erm:

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Plans to make phone use safer for teenagers watered down

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8y7dvw9ddo

Quelle surprise..... :rolleyes:

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Article says parents are screaming for help but the easy solution is simply don't give your little darlings a device you don't want them to have. You are the parent, be one. If they need a device to make calls get them a non-smart phone.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

Not going to happen . Parents are scared to death of there kids :dozey:

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

https://www.advanced-television.com/...s-into-effect/

Well, it’s arrived. How long before the government realises that its powers to to control all things internet are strictly limited?

[EXTRACT]

From today (March 17th), online platforms must start putting in place measures to protect people in the UK from criminal activity, while media regulator Ofcom has launched its latest enforcement programme to assess industry compliance.

Providers of services in scope of the UK’s Online Safety Act had until March 16th to carry out an illegal harms risk assessment – to understand how likely it is that users could encounter illegal content on their service, or, in the case of ‘user-to-user’ services, how they could be used to commit or facilitate certain criminal offences.


Now the next set of illegal harms duties come into force. This means platforms now have to start implementing appropriate measures to remove illegal material quickly when they become aware of it, and to reduce the risk of ‘priority’ criminal content from appearing in the first place.

In the coming weeks and months, Ofcom will be assessing platforms’ compliance with their new illegal harms obligations under the Act, and launching targeted enforcement action where concerns are uncovered.

Given the acute harm caused by the spread of online child sexual abuse material (CSAM), assessing providers’ compliance with their safety duties in this area has been identified as one of our early priorities for enforcement.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

According to Sirius, it's merely advisory...

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

The proof will be in the pudding, It may now be in force but let's see how many big tech companies get fined not some token small site that they use to proclaim it's working.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

The Online Safety Act doesn't go far enough according to Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly took her own life at the age of just 14, after seeing harmful content online. Approximately one young person a week dies and 85% of parents want stronger online legislation.

Also includes a report about the experience of Australia banning under 16's from social media as an ITV poll says that 86% of parents support this.

Possibly to get round the new restrictions, children are now reported to be using coded emojis to bully & insult others.

https://www.itv.com/watch/lorraine/1a9360/1a9360a3829

---------- Post added at 02:03 ---------- Previous post was at 01:44 ----------

By now, whatever their size, the vast majority of websites that contain user to user content will have completed what's required of them in order to comply with the new legislation. It's only those that haven't that leave themselves open to action being taken against them.

I do take your point that it always seems to be the little guy that they go after ie a sole trader is investigated for tax evasion, whilst some of the big companies seem to get away with paying very little, if any, tax.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

It was reported on ITV This Morning that, in a school WhatsApp group, one member chose to make hostile & inflammatory comments whilst discussing the appointment of a new headmaster. The school made a complaint because these remarks were upsetting to their staff, Governors and children.

Six police were sent round to the house of the parent who had done this to arrest them. They were held at the police station for eight hours whilst investigations were made.about harrassment & malicious communication.

It's good that the police are taking the Online Safety Act seriously and, after eight hours, I doubt that they will be doing anything similar again, but six police officers seems like overkill to me at a time when they are saying that they have too few resources.

Re: Online Safety Bill
 

You know that “the process is the punishment” is not a good thing, right? :rolleyes:

It isn’t the police’s job to punish perceived maliciousness by turning up mob-handed and detaining people for hours because of *allegedly* hurty words on WhatsApp. I wonder how quickly Herts police turn up to a burglary, and how many officers they send round?

Add to that, a constable involved in the investigation has now contacted a Hertfordshire County Councillor to warn her off doing her job on pain of being made a suspect in the investigation - he has advised her against contacting the school. For the avoidance of doubt, this is an elected official, whose job includes dealing with constituents’ issues regarding their local school.

Nothing about this is good, Richard, and the only possible good that can come out of this is that the police are going to get a good slapping at the hands of the Home Secretary and people may start to wake up to the highly illiberal and undesirable risks associated with what the Online Safety Act is trying (and manifestly failing) to achieve.