Tech Policy Press’ Post

Neely Center Design Code in Tech Policy Press Article     We are excited to share this Tech Policy Press article that featured Ravi Iyer, our managing director, discussing current design policy with a focus on the California Age Appropriate Design Code and the recent Minnesota legislation on online safety in light of the Neely Center’s Design Code for Social Media that informed the policy dialogues. Through the Neely Center, Ravi Iyer works with stakeholders to propose his own design code reflecting consensus on best practices across the industry. He explains the core value of the “upstream” design and how it can respond to challenges like hate speech. “If you attack hate speech by identifying it and demoting it, you will miss out on, for example, ‘fear speech,’ which still creates a lot of hate. It can be as or more harmful than hate speech. You can’t define all the ways people hate or mislead one another … so you want to discourage all the harmful content, not just what you can identify. This affects the whole ecosystem: publishers see what is and isn’t rewarding.” Do you agree? Please share in the comments below! #NeelyCenter #NeelyDesignCode #TechSafety #NeelyIndices https://lnkd.in/d_DbTbdm

Children's Age Appropriate Design Code is coming to Pennsylvania. With the CA #AADC lawsuit alleging vagueness in the drafting - guidelines or regulations, like the UK Information Commissioner's Office Code, may be advisable. HB 1879 introduced to PA General Assembly by Rep. Donna Johnson Bullock and others addressing the protection of the best interests of children that use online services. What do you need to know? 🔹 Similar to the California Age Appropriate Design code bill that is currently being litigated. May be worthwhile adding the ability to provide guidance /regulations - as vagueness is the main issue with the CA law, and the UK ICO Age Appropriate Design Code (after which both the law and the bill are modeled) provides plenty of resources to draw from. 🔹 Applies to services online services, products or features that children are likely to access. Child = a consumer who you have actual knowledge is under 18. Covered entities are such that knowingly processes a child's personal information 🔹 Requires considering the best interests of children when designing, developing and providing that online service, product or feature. 🔹 Need to conduct and regularly review a DPIA 🔹 Must configure default privacy settings provided to a child by an online service, product or feature to settings that offer a high level of privacy 🔹 Can't use personal information in a way that the covered entity knows is likely to result in high risk to the child 🔹 Can't profile a child by default if the profiling has been identified as high risk to the child 🔹 Can't collect, sell, process or retain the precise geolocation information of a child by default (with some exceptions) 🔹 Can't Track the precise geolocation information of a child without providing notice regarding the tracking of the child's precise geolocation information. 🔹 Prohibitions on use of dark patterns 🔹 Enforceable by the AG with statutory damages and a 90 ay cure 🔹 Effective date within 60 days of passage #dataprivacy #dataprotection #childrensdata #privacyFOMO Image by Freepik https://lnkd.in/e9tXsc9Y

How should the U.S. approach child safety regarding social media and other online outlets? Several states are looking to pass bills similar to those found in the U.K. – one, “Known as the California Age-Appropriate Design Code, requires digital services to “prioritize” the well-being of children when developing products and vet those tools for potential risks before rolling them out.” However, this bill has been blocked as, according to a judge, it “may not pass constitutional muster.” What's your take on the matter? #ChildSafety #OnlineSafety #Legislation #SocialMedia

No secret that it’s very rare for any law to get unanimous support from legislators these days.   But that happened recently for the “California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act,” which would bolster privacy protections for children online by adding restrictions to how Big Tech can collect and use the personal data of kids under 18. The law passed the senate with a vote of 33-0 and the assembly by 60-0 and requires companies that provide online services or products “likely to be accessed by children” to adhere to heightened privacy and data protection standards.   But Big Tech says, “not so fast.” And in September, Big Tech (repped by trade group NetChoice LLC) won a preliminary injunction to prevent the law from taking effect while their lawsuit runs its course. The lawsuit argues that the legislation violates Big Tech’s First Amendment rights (among other rights).   Judge Freeman (U.S. District Court, Northern District CA) agreed and held that the law’s prohibitions on the collection, sale, sharing and retention of children’s personal information and its data protection requirements regulated speech, not conduct. The Court denounced the law’s “clear targeting of certain speakers,” which it found burdened Big Tech but not governmental or nonprofit entities.   So Big Tech wins the battle for today. It will face another battle soon when SCOTUS hears Moody v. NetChoice, which asks whether Big Tech “speaks” by censoring user content. Watch this space for more thoughts on that very soon.   #FirstAmendment #socialmedia #BigTech 

As the school year starts, be careful with posting content of your children online which contains identifiable information. I was interviewed by 1 News on the issue last night. Article and news clip are below!

This article outlines five hidden risks associated with maintaining an inaccessible website, beyond the legal and financial penalties for non-compliance with accessibility standards like the ADA. https://lnkd.in/gNC9VauM

This article outlines five hidden risks associated with maintaining an inaccessible website beyond the legal and financial penalties for non-compliance with accessibility standards like the ADA. https://lnkd.in/gNC9VauM

Do you work for a Colorado government entity? Have you started complying with HB21-1110? If not, you should start. Five months today, July 1, 2024, all parts of the Colorado government must embrace digital accessibility. How does that impact you? Learn more about the Colorado accessibility law: https://hubs.li/Q02jvM7N0 #Accessibility #A11y

What is new with accessibility

Useful summary of amicus briefs in NetChoice v. Bonta, a case involving the 1st Amendment and the California Age Appropriate Design Code Act (CAADCA): https://lnkd.in/dXMdCKXT