Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Age Assurance Digital Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears AB 1043 to require device‑based age signals for safer youth online experiences; tech groups warn of feasibility and privacy risks
Summary
AB 1043 would require devices or operating systems to send a privacy‑preserving age signal to apps, enabling age‑appropriate defaults and parental controls; child‑safety groups backed the concept while tech groups warned of privacy and feasibility risks.
AB 1043 (Wicks) would require device manufacturers or operating systems to offer a mechanism at device setup to indicate the user’s birth date or age range and to transmit a privacy‑preserving age signal to apps and app stores. The author described the proposal as a “device‑based age assurance” approach designed to enable age‑appropriate defaults and parental controls while avoiding centralized collection of personally identifiable data.
Supporters including the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children and survivor families said device‑level age signals are a feasible privacy‑centric way to prevent young users from receiving adult content and to prompt parental controls. Bob Cunningham of ICMEC said the technology is already used widely and that age assurance is “the critical first step” for protecting children online.
Opponents — including Chamber of Progress, TechNet and others — expressed concerns that device manufacturers should not be forced to manage age signals, that the brackets could be unreliable and lead to de facto age verification with privacy risks, and that developers and app stores already offer parental‑control tools. Chamber of Progress warned the approach could push developers toward age verification and said app stores are better placed to moderate content.
Committee members asked technical and policy questions about liability, whether age signals would trigger civil liability for developers, how parental tools would be connected, and alternatives proposed by Apple and Google. The author said she will work with stakeholders to refine definitions and address privacy and operational concerns.
No vote on AB 1043 was recorded in the excerpted transcript; debate concluded with the author’s commitment to continue stakeholder negotiations.
