The California Assembly Bill 1043, known as the Digital Age Assurance Act (DAAA), has sparked controversy over its vague language and punitive fines for non-compliance. The law requires operating systems and app stores to implement age verification during account setup to protect minors online. However, critics argue that it sets a chilling effect on innovation and is overly broad.
The law’s definition of “digital signals” between OS, application stores, and apps excludes analog devices like smart TVs, which can be used by all ages. It also talks about “age verification” without verification itself, raising concerns about its effectiveness. The law’s lack of clarity on what non-compliance looks like could lead to a range of unintended consequences, including the development of vintage computing emulators and forced hardware upgrades.
The impact of DAAA on open source software (FOSS) is also uncertain. FOSS projects are typically maintained by communities with many contributors, making it unclear who would be responsible for age verification under the law. This has sparked philosophical questions about the role of government in regulating FOSS.
While some may view DAAA as a necessary measure to protect minors online, critics see it as a prime example of magical thinking and regulatory overreach. They argue that such laws only serve to create a “chilling effect” on innovation and limit freedom.
In contrast, a Texas Senate Bill 2420 (the App Store Accountability Act) has been suspended by a federal court due to concerns over its broad scope and potential First Amendment violations. The suspension of this law offers some relief for developers and users, but it does not address the broader issues raised by DAAA.
Ultimately, there is hope that future legislation will be more effective and less restrictive in its approach. As one commentator joked, “Forget age verification for operating systems, but bring in clue verification for politicians.” This sentiment highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to regulating technology and protecting users’ rights.
Source: https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/16/opinon_column_age_verification