MPs Consider Law Forcing All UK ISPs to Block Adult-Only Websites

Ministers debating the new Digital Economy Bill 2016-17 are starting to discover what many already knew, that the proposals to add ‘Age Verification’ to pornographic websites may in practice be unworkable. Instead some of them want to impose a duty on all broadband ISPs to block “adult-only content” by default.

One of the biggest challenges with the ‘Age Verification‘ approach is with how you actually make it work, so that people can’t get around it simply by inputting fake details. As such most of the approaches being proposed would require people to share their private personal and or financial details with unreliable porn peddlers, and possibly the Government too, in order to gain access.

However the infamous Ashley Madison hacking affair showed just how dangerous such information can be in the wrong hands (following in its wake were countless cases of blackmail and suicide etc.), not that the more puritanical elements of the Government would care about a few dead people and blackmail getting in the way of a moral crusade.

On top of that the government would only be able to apply such rules to companies based in the United Kingdom, but since most porn sites operate outside of the country then additional measures might be required in order to tackle those and this is where we come back to website blocking.

At present all of the biggest fixed line broadband ISPs and mobile operators have already adopted a voluntary (Active Choice Plus) approach to network-level filtering, which gives new and existing subscribers a choice about whether or not to enable adult website blocking on their connection. Sky Broadband has also gone one step further and introduced a default-on approach like the mobile operators employ (here), but you can still turn it off later.

The trouble is that the EU’s new Net Neutrality rules warn that ISP imposed network-level blocking systems are “not consistent with the regulation” (here) and as such the Government has long been pondering a change of law in order to override the measures (here). In that sense it came as no surprise to find that MP Claire Perry is once again trying to push website blocking into the bill via three new clauses.

Claire Perry’s Proposed Clauses

New clause 8 – Duty to provide a service that excludes adult-only content

New clause 11 – Power to make regulations about blocking injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet

New clause 6 – Requirement to cease services to non-complying persons

The clauses do not, at this stage, appear to make any exception for smaller ISPs and that’s important because many of those might struggle to afford or implement such a system. But in fairness the proposals do still allow subscribers to disable the blocking by virtue of either being over the age of 18 or specifically opting-in to receive an unfiltered connection.

On the other hand there’s a big question mark over the proposal to block websites via a court injunction, which can apply purely for not being able to comply with the age-verification requirements. The courts should normally only be used against truly illegal content and until now porn has not been illegal.

Mind you the above assumes that the law would remain restricted to porn, but the proposal vaguely defines “adult-only content” as “material that contains offensive and harmful material from which persons under the age of 18 are protected“. We can see a lot of potential for injunctions.

MP Claire Perry said:

Clause 8

“This new clause places a statutory requirement on internet service providers to limit access to adult content by persons under 18. It would give Ofcom a role in determining the age verification scheme and how material should be filtered. It would ensure that ISPs were able to continue providing family friendly filtering once the net neutrality rules come into force in December 2016.”

Clause 11

“This new Clause empowers the Secretary of State to introduce regulations in relation to the granting of a backstop blocking injunction by a court. The injunction would require an internet service provider to prevent access to a site or sites which do not comply with the age-verification requirements. This would only be used where the other enforcement powers (principally fines) had not been effective in ensuring that sites put in place effective age-verification.”

Clause 6

“This new clause requires payment and ancillary services to block payments or cease services made to pornography websites that do not offer age-verification if they have received a notice of non-compliance under section 22(1). This provision would only apply to websites outside of the UK. This would enhance the enforcement mechanisms that are available under the Bill.”

At this point it’s important to remember that more than two thirds of UK households don’t have children, which roughly reflects the limited uptake of ISP based network-level blocking features (here). It’s also true that a large proportion of adults do access porn online (here), even though it’s one of those taboo subjects and so is not widely considered.

The other challenge is that no new age verification or blocking approach will actually work because anybody who wants to find and access such material will easily be able to circumvent such blocks, such as via a proxy server or VPN. All of the circumvention methods are easy to use and you can bet the last pound in your pocket that the kids know more about it than the rest of us.

On the other hand it is a good thing that ISPs offers parents the option to enable such filtering, but it should perhaps never be enforced by default and mandating it through a law carries a big risk of unintended consequences or mission creep. It remains to be seen whether any of this makes it into the final law.