Summary

📘

Summary from the author - Andrew Wailes, CEO PlaySafe ID.

I believe that the Online Safety Act and Ofcom are well intentioned and basing their legislative and compliance frameworks from extensive research, data, and consultation (with industry, users, parents, and children). I also believe that any reasonable adult with a common-sense view can appreciate the online world as it is today is not a safe environment for children. By giving children access to the internet, we are giving them access to any and all content, as well as the ability to contact or be contacted by any and all people. A literal Pandora's box.

It is for these reasons that I believe the Online Safety Act is a positive legislative and compliance beachhead which has the potential to make an incredibly positive impact on the lives of millions of children in the UK - and as the Australian and EU member state versions come into effect, across the world too.

I think that age-gating as it stands today (asking a user if they’re over 18 and to click a button) is a woefully pathetic system, and in 10 years we will all look back at how bad it was, and shake our heads collectively in disbelief at how easy it was for children to access things which we all universally agree as a society that they shouldn’t be able to access.

I feel that highly effective age assurance is an incredibly positive step, especially when implemented through a reusable digital identity service who uses photo-ID verification. I think it provides as frictionless and as positive an experience as possible for the user, whilst minimising disruption, risk, cost, effort, and liability on the game studio/developer. We have also already proven at PlaySafe ID that gamers are happy to verify themselves in exchange for a better gaming experience - as long as their data is secure and never shared with the game studio, and with the addition of PlaySafe Protected matchmaking to keep cheaters & bad actors out of games.

I also think that the measures to restrict functionality that isn’t age appropriate, or that may contain the risk of exposing children to illegal content or harmful content is a good step. There will likely be resistance, or reluctance, of games wanting to implement these features (because it’s time, money, effort, and extra work). But, it’s now business-critical for them to do so, and I think it’s a positive thing. I do also like that Ofcom have taken a proportionate response and not made it a requirement to gate access to all services prior to a user completing the HEAA process. Just gating the functionality that poses the risk is a positive step that should minimise disruption to games.

Ultimately, I suppose my final thought is this:

Games are supposed to be fun. They aren’t supposed to be dangerous.Kids shouldn’t be at risk of CSEA, CSAM, or grooming. They also shouldn’t be at risk of coming into contact with suicide or self-harm content, bullying, abuse or hate content, or violent content.

The experience of playing a game should be something we all look forward to - not something that fills parents with dread or leaves children frightened, scared, sad - or damaged.

It’s all of our jobs to do better.And the Online Safety Act and Ofcom are taking the legislative and compliance framework steps to ensure that we all collectively do better. Because children deserve better than we’ve all been able to deliver so far.