California Senate Passes Three Awful Bills For The Internet; Will Newsom Sign Them?
from the california-stabs-the-internet dept
Unfortunately, last night, the California Senate passed some horribly dangerous bills that we’ve been warning about the past few weeks — and they’re heading to Governor Newsom’s desk for signing. It seems likely he will sign them, even as that will be a huge, and dangerous mistake. First up was AB 2273 the “Age Appropriate Design Code” that we’ve been calling attention to over the past week. The bill has massive problems, is literally impossible to comply with, was written in part by a UK Baroness with ties to Hollywood, will only serve to benefit privacy lawyers and a giant porn company, and could lead to websites requiring a facial scan for access (and that’s according to the bill’s supporters!). It’s a bad bill.
But no politician wants to hand political opponents the talking point of “and s/he voted against a bill to protect the children online!” And thus… the bill passed 30 to 0. Not a single Senator voted against it.
This is super annoying.
Another bill that passed was AB 587. I wrote about this one a few weeks ago as well. It was pitched as a “transparency” bill, but as Eric Goldman noted, was functionally identical to the Texas and Florida laws that were booted for being unconstitutional. My own complaint was more direct. Under 587, websites now basically have to teach disinfo peddlers how best to game their systems, and can’t do much to deal with them without violating the law.
This one passed 31 to 3.
There was also a third bill, AB 2879, which effectively tries to ban bad people “cyberbullying” online. We only had time to mention that one in passing, because we’re just a small operation here, and there’s only so much we can do — especially when none of the big free speech / open internet organizations seemed willing to speak up against these bills.
It seems likely that Newsom will sign all of these bills — though now would be a good time for California residents and companies to call the governor’s office and tell him how much damage these bills will do to the internet, to free speech, and to privacy.
These bills are fundamentally flawed. They are written by people who do not understand how the internet works at all — and they will backfire. The “protect the kids” bill will encourage dystopian facial scanning or other age verification checks, despite the enormous harm such systems do. It will enable so much harm and make it more difficult for the internet to function. At least for the companies that abide by the bill. Many others will almost certainly ignore it because it’s impossible to comply with.
The “transparency” bill is a complete and utter mess. It totally misunderstands fundamental aspects of how trust and safety works. It misunderstands the dynamic nature of threats and bad actors, and basically requires websites to provide an unchangeable roadmap for how to abuse any website in a manner where the website’s hands are tied behind their back if they want to change their policies.
The cyberbullying bill is based on a fantasy, and will actually make it that much more difficult for websites to deal with cyberbullying.
And, now you can bet that other states — including Texas and Florida — will model their own internet-attacking bills on these California bills as well.
It’s not good.
It’s frustrating and exhausting beyond all belief that California is doing this. And that there have been very, very few voices speaking up about it. It’s that kind of apathy that lets these bills sail through.
Filed Under: ab 2273, ab 2879, ab 587, california, cyberbullying, for the children, free speech, gavin newsom, privacy, transparency
Comments on “California Senate Passes Three Awful Bills For The Internet; Will Newsom Sign Them?”
Me: You were the chosen one! You were said to destroy the Digital Scare, not join them! Bring balance to the Internet, not leave it in darkness!
California: T H I N K O F T H E C H I L D R E N !
Me: You were one of my favorite states, California! I loved you!
Re:
But in all honesty, what the actual fuck, California?
Re: Re:
California is the home of Hollywood, and Hollywood likes to damage the Internet, and will destroy it given half a chance.
Re: Re: Re:
“As everyone well knows, the only thing the Internet is used for is downloading infringing copies of content,” said Wikipedia and various blogs et al. to no one ever.
Re: Re: Re:2
You jest, but idiots like Richard Bennett have previously claimed that we didn’t need net neutrality or consistent, high bandwidth Internet access. The only ones who’d need it, according to him, were pirates.
the nanny state again
Do kids not have parents anymore? Just take their internet access away till they’re old enough to have a job and buy their own damn iphone.
I have my laptop camera permanently blocked. Go ahead and try to scan my face. (I’m sure enterprising kiddies can figure out a way around that one anyway.)
Re:
“No, they don’t!” — lawmakers, probably
Re:
Do kids not have parents anymore?
Legislators obviously don’t think so and that’s why they’re trying to fill the perceived ‘gap’ in provision.
Re:
Kids often need internet access to do homework. It’s not just a toy.
Where was the EFF while this crap worked itself through the most ignorant legislature in the country?
Do we need to fund a GoFundMe to underwrite the legal fees to promptly get this declared unconstitutional. That, by itself, will be a challenge, although there are a few Federal judges who have demonstrated that they do understand how the Internet works. The Supreme Court may, however, be another bastion of irrational behavior.
Re:
Apparently the EFF and TechNet (which represents the larger companies) have written against this bill.
My suspicion is that it’s been under the radar due to other issues, like Texas and Florida being predictably awful with their attempts, as well as California passing this bill under the radar.
https://www.sfgate.com/cnet/article/California-Lawmakers-Pass-Landmark-Kids-Online-17407483.php
Apparently the EFF and TechNet (which represents the larger companies) have written against this bill.
My suspicion is that it’s been under the radar due to other issues, like Texas and Florida being predictably awful with their attempts, as well as California passing this bill under the radar.
https://www.sfgate.com/cnet/article/California-Lawmakers-Pass-Landmark-Kids-Online-17407483.php
It’s time for websites to geo-block California. Pass people off, so they take notice.
Any chance this gets challenged in the courts?
Re:
Very likely seeing this bill is very unconstitutional.
Re: Re: Doubts
I doubt the courts are gonna be much help. Especially the Supreme Court.
Re: Re: Re:
Why do you say that? this bill goes against Reno v. ACLU and the Supreme Court has already blocked other laws like this such as the Texas social media law.
Re: Re: Re:2
Why do you say that?
Because the Supreme Court has already decided that people with uteruses have no right against the unreasonable seizure of their bodies for the purposes of forced pregnancies even though the Fourth Amendment says otherwise.
I called Newsom’s office and asked that he veto these bills.
Anyone have a scorecard that ranks the states on stupid legislative tricks for 2022? Seems like it would be a busy one.
Re:
Maybe you could create a Harmful Legislation Bingo card.
'Land of tech'? Not any more it isn't
Well that’s one way to tank your economy by driving a huge(ly profitable) industry out of it…
I was not aware that the UK and the US were taking notes on how China is doing ID nonsense and managing to make it worse.
It seems California is taking notes from the uk and other country’s as to how to break the Internet, one can’t rely on the present supreme Court to fix anything since its dominated by religious Conservatives who are ready to ignore logic or legal precedent.
Re:
It likely the supreme Court will block this law.
I really don’t see how companies can comply with this, and to think kids won’t find a workaround to something like this? Come on.