Big Tech Sues Texas, Says Age-Verification Law Is 'Broad Censorship Regime' (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0179817124
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/10/17/2032236/big-tech-sues-texas-says-age-verification-law-is-broad-censorship-regime
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/10/big-tech-sues-texas-says-age-verification-law-is-broad-censorship-regime/
> Texas is being [1]sued by a Big Tech lobby group over the state's [2]new law that will require app stores to verify users' ages and impose restrictions on users under 18. "The Texas App Store Accountability Act imposes a broad censorship regime on the entire universe of mobile apps," the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) said yesterday in [3]a lawsuit (PDF). "In a misguided attempt to protect minors, Texas has decided to require proof of age before anyone with a smartphone or tablet can download an app. Anyone under 18 must obtain parental consent for every app and in-app purchase they try to download -- from ebooks to email to entertainment."
>
> The CCIA said in a [4]press release that the law violates the First Amendment by imposing "a sweeping age-verification, parental consent, and compelled speech regime on both app stores and app developers." When app stores determine that a user is under 18, "the law prohibits them from downloading virtually all apps and software programs and from making any in-app purchases unless their parent consents and is given control over the minor's account," the CCIA said. "Minors who are unable to link their accounts with a parent's or guardian's, or who do not receive permission, would be prohibited from accessing app store content."
>
> The law requires app developers "to 'age-rate' their content into several subcategories and explain their decision in detail," and "notify app stores in writing every time they improve or modify the functions, features, or user experience of their apps," the group said. The lawsuit says the age-rating system relies on a "vague and unworkable set of age categories." "Our Constitution forbids this," the lawsuit said. "None of our laws require businesses to 'card' people before they can enter bookstores and shopping malls. The First Amendment prohibits such oppressive laws as much in cyberspace as it does in the physical world." The lawsuit was filed in US District Court for the Western District of Texas. CCIA members include Apple and Google, which have both said the law would reduce privacy for app users. The companies recently described their plans to comply, saying they would take steps to minimize the privacy risks.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/10/big-tech-sues-texas-says-age-verification-law-is-broad-censorship-regime/
[2] https://legiscan.com/TX/bill/SB2420/2025
[3] https://ccianet.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Dkt.-1-Complaint.pdf
[4] https://ccianet.org/news/2025/10/ccia-sues-texas-to-block-unconstitutional-app-store-law/
Supreme Court (Score:2, Troll)
I hope I have misinterpreted the Supreme Court/U.S. Taliban, but didn't they already say the Texas law was constitutional? I hope I'm wrong, because these age verification laws are blatantly unconstitutional.
They're going to come for vpn's next (Score:3, Insightful)
And video games after that. Every now and then they will let the cat out of the bag too. All these age verification laws originate with a group out of Australia of all things which was one of the groups that got GTA banned over there for the longest time.
The bottom line is they don't want us to have any other media choices besides what they want to put in front of us. In particular they want us back in church tithing.
And not your nice small Church where everybody's nice but those weird creepy mega churches where the pastors get caught diddling kids every couple of months.
Re: (Score:1)
There must be a ways to satisfy all parties. I'm sure this brainstorming idea won't go over well, but others may have better ideas: Sell a finger print USB dongle in retail places after proof of age. They finger print you at the POS. That unlocks a person on the internet?
Re: (Score:2)
> There must be a ways to satisfy all parties.
There is and it's called a [1]Lightspeed Rocket [shi.com]. Put that on the kids' internet connection at the ISP , and problem solved. No need for random sites to perform "age verification" or ask for your long form birth certificate, SSN, drivers license, passport, and CC#. Even better, no need for certain countries to intrude on the sovereignty of other nations. You can do it entirely from a domestic stand point, and block the problem at the source: The unsupervised kid making network requests they shouldn't.
Of cour
[1] https://www.shi.com/product/31364228/Lightspeed-Rocket-Web-Filter-10-GB-Fiber-LR
Re: (Score:2)
That seems like absolute common sense to me. If we were to implement that, then at night I may go "Whew, I live in a common sense world", and sleep better.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not getting it.
Can't speak for Texas but I caught an interview with the sponsor of the porn bill in Kentucky, and he made clear one of the effects he was after was to drive such content from the state.
PornHub has proposed methods to verify age that are less onerous (tying age to a device, verified at point of sell), but they have been shot down as not being stringent enough (as if sending a copy of an ID isn't easy enough to spoof).
This isn't about "for the children" inasmuch as soft banning certain
Re: (Score:2)
as much as i may get in karma trouble for this, for other states other than texas, please support x videos. they are the only porn site who is defying the Texas ban and is for.. well.. porn. They have articles about free speech on their site as well. Not that I would ever visit them ;-).
Re: They're going to come for vpn's next (Score:1)
I noticed you did not mention the real problem here: porn. It is why we have this law. Porn is really bad for humans - it is a hyperstimulus, similar to cocaine or meth- and deserves serious regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
Banning pornography is a key part of Project 2025, mind you. How that comes about is a bit up in the area, but it's coming. It's one of the bigger unfulfilled parts that Trump hasn't touched yet.
And the way individual states are doing things to make abortion illegal in all states, even in states without such laws.
It's all laid out in the book, everything that's happening, how it's happening is right there
Because Big Tech has principles, yessiree (Score:3)
Censorship is a big no-no for tech companies. Particularly when it doesn't make then any money.
It isn't "carding" (Score:2)
> "None of our laws require businesses to 'card' people before they can enter bookstores and shopping malls."
This misses the point ENTIRELY.
They aren't "carding" people who go to their site, they are demanding POSITIVE ID of every person. They have no other method to simply confirm "18 or older" without knowing and recording and saving WHO THAT IS. Carding someone is looking ONLY at the birthdate or photo orientation to determine yes/no, without regard of the name, address, ID number, sex, or any other
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, an age-only verification without identity disclosure is possible. But it requires a trusted third party and the prevalent spying on all citizens in the US will make it impossible to implement securely.
Re: (Score:2)
> "In theory, an age-only verification without identity disclosure is possible."
In theory, yes. But that isn't what will happen
> "But it requires a trusted third party"
Right. But there is no such thing. And we shouldn't have to be carded at all, anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
> But there is no such thing.
There can be such a thing. And there are examples of that approach working. But it requires a strong political will to make it work.
Evil vs. Evil (Score:3)
I hope these two groups annihilate each other and we can go ahead with a world that is a bit more sane. Sadly, that is unlikely to happen.
No-one wants the answer (Score:2)
Large-scale government-enforced spying has been around for 20 years and has not reduced crime. In fact, the resulting trove of surveillance data is so valuable that it causes more crime. Now, governments want corporations to provide the same abuse to children, in the delusion of saving them. The problem is not the necessity or efficacy of saving children, it is the collateral damage. Corporations should not be helping the government spy on people. That is absolute (and reporting business events, Eg. mo
First post! (Score:2, Informative)
Apologies, it's been about 25 years since I did this.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be 18 to post he-... Oh... Sorry, grandpa.
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome back! Would you like some hot grits?
Re: (Score:2)
lol, yes I first read that as "hot girls".... lmfao.
Re: (Score:2)
It has gotten rather easy. Congratulations anyways.