Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the law says they have to do all these specific things for minors and prevent non minors from communicating them. Therefore they have to identify the minors somehow in order to comply

I see nothing in it that requires the company to identify minor :marseyminer: accounts. Care you link to what part of the bill specifies that?

Given that similar :marseypamsame: online :marseyidio3: bills don't have any such requirement I doubt :marseybruh2: they'll add it to this one. For example, companies are already banned :marseyban: from collecting advertising data on users aged 13 or younger. Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. are all in compliance with this law. Do you need an ID to use any of these websites? No, no you don't. Some of them just added age requirements to make an account - again, as you'll notice, it's largely on the honor system. I'm not aware :marseyitneverbegan: of ANY litigation against, say, Reddit.com for allowing a 12-year-old to make an account. Do you care to link any such legal case?

You're spinning :marseydizzy: a bunch of r-slurred :marseyretard4: hypotheticals to get yourself :marseydespawnurself: worked up over it because you hate laws in general. While calling me a commie :marseysaluteussr: for some unspecified reason.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Given that similar online bills don't have any such requirement I doubt they'll add it to this one

here

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/florida-ron-desantis-signs-bill-social-media-kids-ban-rcna144950

bc of that bill if you go to reddit or a porn site from a Florida server you will see that those bills have made those sites feel checking ID is required.

evrything else you just said, shows your lack of lack of awareness of the above and your general lack of understanding of the legal system.

You're spinning :marseydizzy: a bunch of r-slurred :marseyretard4: hypotheticals to get yourself :marseydespawnurself: worked up over it because you hate laws in general

hypotheticals are the only way to analyze a law that has yet to be enacted/enforced you dumb commie.

calling me a commie :marseysaluteussr: for some unspecified reason.

this was a determination I made in my last conversatiom with you about another topic, commie

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Companies that fail to do so could be sued on behalf of the child :marseyzoomer: who creates an account on the platform. The minor :marseyminer: could be awarded up to $10,000 in damages, according to the bill. Companies found :marseymissing2: to be in violation of the law would :marseymid: also be liable for up to $50,000 per violation, as well as attorney's fees and court :marseykrayongrouns: costs.

Where is any of this in the bill this post is about in the senate?

This is the critical part of the bill that I don't see in the senate one but for some reason you're convinced it exists... somewhere.. who knows where :marseydrama: but somewhere.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I already explained this to you, butt youre too either to dumb to understand it, or more likely your engaged in classic foid brained cognitive dissonance. Either way, I wish you :marseybootlicker:luck at your next CCP rally

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:!chad: : this bill doesn't seem to include anything :marseycoleporter: that would :marseywood: force :marseyjetbombing: companies to validate IDs

:marseybrainlet: : y-yeah well this completely different :marseyvenn3: florida bill does!!

cool talk bb

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Typical dumb commie, misrepresenting and playing semantics in order to defend the erosion of liberty. You should just move to china or russia if you like laws like this.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

nah I'm gonna :marseyvenn6: stay in the objectively best country :marseyukraineflag: in the world :marseykamikaze: bb

:#marseysaluteusa:

u can leave :marseypeaceout: if ur blasted about this tho

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

im not worried, SCOTUS will strike it down as unconstitutional, butt you wouldnt understand that bc its a hypothetical and youre a dumb commie who lacks the capacity for abstract thought.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sure they will bb. Just like they struck down that law banning companies from collecting marketing data on children :marseychildcatcher: - oh whoops haha guess :marseyshrug: that's still on the books :marseysexylibrarian: (and is getting augmented by this)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments
Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.