COPPA 2.0: The New Battle Over Privacy, Age Verification, Online Safety & Free Speech

B. Szoka, Adam Thierer
{"title":"COPPA 2.0: The New Battle Over Privacy, Age Verification, Online Safety & Free Speech","authors":"B. Szoka, Adam Thierer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1408204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Online privacy, child safety, free speech and anonymity are on a collision course. The 1998 Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) already mandates certain online privacy protections for children under 13, but many advocate expanding online privacy protections for both adolescents and adults. Furthermore, efforts continue at both the federal and state levels to institute new regulations, such as age verification mandates, aimed at ensuring the safety of children online. There is an inherent tension between these objectives: Attempts to achieve perfectly “safe” online environments will likely require the surrender of some privacy and speech rights, including the right to speak anonymously. These tensions are coming to a head with state-based efforts to expand COPPA, which requires “verifiable parental consent” before certain sites or services may collect, or enable the sharing of, personal information from children under the age of 13. Several proposed state laws would extend COPPA’s parental-consent framework to cover all adolescents under 18. This seemingly small change would require age verification of not only adolescents and their parents, but - for the first time - large numbers of adults, thus raising grave First Amendment concerns. Such broad age verification mandates would, ironically, reduce online privacy by requiring more information to be collected from both adolescents and adults for age verification purposes, while doing little to make adolescents safer. In practical terms, the increased scale of “COPPA 2.0” efforts would present significant implementation and enforcement challenges. Finally, state-level COPPA 2.0 proposals would likely conflict with the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. Despite these profound problems, COPPA expansion has great rhetorical appeal and seems likely to be at the heart of future child safety debates - especially efforts to require mandatory age verification. There are, however, many better ways to protect children online than by expanding COPPA beyond its original, limited purpose.","PeriodicalId":166493,"journal":{"name":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1408204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Online privacy, child safety, free speech and anonymity are on a collision course. The 1998 Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) already mandates certain online privacy protections for children under 13, but many advocate expanding online privacy protections for both adolescents and adults. Furthermore, efforts continue at both the federal and state levels to institute new regulations, such as age verification mandates, aimed at ensuring the safety of children online. There is an inherent tension between these objectives: Attempts to achieve perfectly “safe” online environments will likely require the surrender of some privacy and speech rights, including the right to speak anonymously. These tensions are coming to a head with state-based efforts to expand COPPA, which requires “verifiable parental consent” before certain sites or services may collect, or enable the sharing of, personal information from children under the age of 13. Several proposed state laws would extend COPPA’s parental-consent framework to cover all adolescents under 18. This seemingly small change would require age verification of not only adolescents and their parents, but - for the first time - large numbers of adults, thus raising grave First Amendment concerns. Such broad age verification mandates would, ironically, reduce online privacy by requiring more information to be collected from both adolescents and adults for age verification purposes, while doing little to make adolescents safer. In practical terms, the increased scale of “COPPA 2.0” efforts would present significant implementation and enforcement challenges. Finally, state-level COPPA 2.0 proposals would likely conflict with the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. Despite these profound problems, COPPA expansion has great rhetorical appeal and seems likely to be at the heart of future child safety debates - especially efforts to require mandatory age verification. There are, however, many better ways to protect children online than by expanding COPPA beyond its original, limited purpose.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COPPA 2.0:关于隐私,年龄验证,在线安全和言论自由的新战斗
网络隐私、儿童安全、言论自由和匿名正在发生冲突。1998年的《儿童网络隐私保护法》(COPPA)已经规定了对13岁以下儿童的某些网络隐私保护,但许多人主张扩大对青少年和成年人的网络隐私保护。此外,联邦和州两级仍在努力制定新的法规,例如年龄验证规定,旨在确保儿童上网安全。这些目标之间存在着内在的紧张关系:试图实现完全“安全”的在线环境可能需要放弃一些隐私和言论权利,包括匿名发言的权利。随着各州努力扩大COPPA,这些紧张关系达到了顶峰。COPPA要求某些网站或服务在收集或分享13岁以下儿童的个人信息之前,必须获得“可核实的父母同意”。几个州的法律提案将把COPPA的父母同意框架扩展到所有18岁以下的青少年。这一看似很小的变化不仅需要对青少年及其父母进行年龄验证,而且第一次需要对大量成年人进行年龄验证,从而引发了对宪法第一修正案的严重担忧。具有讽刺意味的是,这种广泛的年龄验证授权要求从青少年和成年人那里收集更多的信息,从而减少了在线隐私,而对青少年的安全却没有什么帮助。实际上,“COPPA 2.0”工作规模的扩大将带来重大的实施和执法挑战。最后,州一级的COPPA 2.0提案可能与宪法的商业条款相冲突。尽管存在这些深刻的问题,COPPA的扩展具有巨大的修辞吸引力,似乎可能成为未来儿童安全辩论的核心-特别是要求强制年龄验证的努力。然而,除了将COPPA扩展到其最初的有限目的之外,还有许多更好的方法来保护在线儿童。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Antitrust Error Costs Bostock was Bogus: Textualism, Pluralism, and Title VII 5G Deployment: The Role and Challenges of Regulatory Bodies in Ensuring Convergence Within the EU Data Point: 2019 Mortgage Market Activity and Trends The CIA's Democratic Integrity: Information Sharing and Electoral Accountability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1