Washington – Minnesota is advancing legislation that would require online sites to collect additional personal data, including verifying users age and geolocation to comply with a slate of proposals aimed at protecting teens online. The Computer & Communications Industry Association supports enhanced privacy protections for children and teens online, but testified against this legislation during a Monday hearing.
CCIA’s Jordan Rodell said that the definitions and the compliance requirements in the bill are more vague in some areas and overly prescriptive in others, which would lead companies to collect more personal data to prove compliance with the rules or to block minors from some digital sites and services.
In written testimony, Rodell told lawmakers, “When businesses are required to deny access to social networking sites or other online resources, this may also unintentionally restrict children’s ability to access and connect with like-minded individuals and communities. For example, children of racial or other minority groups may not live in an area where they can easily connect with others that represent and relate to their own unique experiences. An online central meeting place where kids can share their experiences and find support can have positive impacts.”
The following can be attributed to CCIA State Policy Manager Jordan Rodell:
“CCIA supports enhanced privacy measures for teens and bills like this that would lead to additional data collection are problematic as they come at a time when online sites and services are trying to reduce the data they collect on all users.
“It is important for stakeholders to understand that similar laws in the UK avoided these unintended consequences with guidelines rather than putting companies at greater risk for liability. In the UK, companies offering online services do not have to implement so-called ‘age-estimation’ measures. Another difference is that UK internet users don’t have the same First Amendment rights that a teen in the US has, so companies here can also face legal consequences for both following the proposed Minnesota law – and not following it.”