back to article We knew it was coming: Bureaucratic cockup triggers '6-month' delay of age verification block on porno in the UK

The British government is expected to announce an indefinite delay to its controversial legislation requiring age verification from porn users. According to Sky News overnight, Secretary of State for the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Jeremy Wright will announce the freeze today. We're told that the …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Phew, thank the gods. I thought i might have to resubscribe to Razzle again in July.

    1. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      Pint

      RE: Anonymous Wanker

      Just change your VPN to Switzerland. You do have a VPN to protect your privacy from the snooper's charter right? right?

      1. TheVogon Silver badge

        Re: RE: Anonymous Wanker

        Do you need to be over 18 to have a VPN or use a proxy server now then? Otherwise isn't this completely and utterly pointless? Screw handing over any of my personal data to porn sites.

        https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/brazzers-porn-site-data-breach-details-of-800000-users-leaked-by-hackers-a3338031.html

        And if I understand correctly, verification involves scanning a passport or driving license and uploading it. Not clear what stops kids simply using someone else's documents?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: RE: Anonymous Wanker

          Yeah but VPONs are simply honeypots in the end.

          You may get through with much reduced speeds but anon? Phlease....you're for sale.

          1. julian.smith
            Thumb Down

            Re: RE: Anonymous Wanker: BS alert

            "Yeah but VPONs (sic) are simply honeypots in the end."

            Citation required else it's BS

            1. vaporland

              iPredator.se

              Run by the guys who started pirate Bay.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I preferred Knave the Ebony and Ivory special, I remember it to this day, from the 90s. And how fucking disappointed was I went I finally purchased a copy of Playboy.

      Plucking up the courage as a school boy to buy porn mags wasn't easy, especially when it was my local and I'd normally only buy comics :) So I wanted good stuff. Only to come out with Playboy and finding it mostly text!

      WHAT!!!!!

      And then overly airbrushed women, BORING.

      Anon for obvious reasons.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I remember finding a copy of razzle stuffed in a hedge at the start of the summer holidays in something like 1984 I would have been 13/14, it kept me and my mates entertained for all of the 6 weeks!

        1. Claverhouse Silver badge

          And School Counsellors were no help at all in helping enquiring young minds get information they craved for...

        2. The Nazz Silver badge

          Razzle, the greatest embarrassment of my life.

          My mag of choice, Reader's wives oooh err.

          I'd stopped off on the way home from collecting the sprog (perhaps 18 month old) from the day nursery

          and mag in one hand, sprog held in other arm i approached the counter and young sales assistant.

          Immediately she says "oh hello, *********". Turns out, unbeknownst to me, that by day she was a nursery assistant. Probably the last one i ever bought.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I remember in the late 80s or early 90s we found a stack of mags in the local park in the wooded area by the canal. A homeless guy had setup a tent and it was his stash. Was with school "mates" and then on the walk to school a few days later, I had a brain wave. I could get free porn mags, I only needed to steal a few copies. I always walked to school on my own. Got there and they were all gone.

          Later that day some how managed to quietly bring the subject up but not letting on I'd paid a visit to get free mags. One of the "mates" said he and another kid from our class had visited there again the day before and threw them all in the canal.

          ARSE!

      2. Claverhouse Silver badge

        Playboy women, lovely as they very obviously were, were mainly orange, with an aurore aura and a coral hue.

        I suspect America's Greatest Living National Treasure was slightly colour-blind and imposed this rule since that's how he saw the world.

        1. Simon Harris Silver badge

          My ex's father had cataract surgery and said that afterwards white things appeared white again instead of an orangy-brown colour.

      3. Fred Dibnah Silver badge
        Happy

        Playboy was the one jazz mag where the articles & stories really were worth reading. Roald Dahl wrote a lot for them - see 'The Great Switcheroo' for instance.

        1. BebopWeBop Silver badge
          Trollface

          I was always curious as to whether this was an attempt to provide a more plausible (just more - no absolute) cover for those men who bought it 'for the articles'? Some writers did contribute though (I believe`)

          1. Simon Harris Silver badge

            There were a lot of well known authors who used to write for it - some of whom you probably wouldn't have expected.

            https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41426419

            Off the top of my head, I also know Philip K. Dick and Robert Silverberg used to be published in the magazine too.

        2. The Nazz Silver badge

          And many an article by the late great Shel Silverstein, who i believe maintained a home in the main Playboy mansion. What a life.

      4. J. R. Hartley Silver badge

        Try being a gay 17 year old working on a building site, sneaking off after work to buy a grumble mag with my fucking hard hat in my hand and everything. Talk about the fear. Luckily the internet was invented 2 years later in 2001.

        1. eldakka Silver badge

          Luckily the internet was invented 2 years later in 2001.

          The Internet is far older than that. Hell, I was pulling porn off FTP servers in 1991, and I was a late-comer (ba dum tish) even then.

          1. rskurat

            Ditto. Luckily we had vaxes at uni so command line wasn't a problem despite being a biochem major. Thank god for FTP and "3.5 inch floppies" - let's just take the jokes as given shall we?

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            " Luckily the internet was invented 2 years later in 2001.

            The Internet is far older than that. Hell, I was pulling porn off FTP servers in 1991, and I was a late-comer (ba dum tish) even then."

            The 'net was around then sure, but it truly didn't come into its own until they'd worked out the ergonomics and made it browsable with one hand

          3. J. R. Hartley Silver badge

            Whooooooosh :/

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Try being a gay 17 year old working on a building site, sneaking off after work to buy a grumble mag with my fucking hard hat in my hand and everything. Talk about the fear. Luckily the internet was invented 2 years later in 2001.

          You were lucky that you weren't arrested if you went around everywhere with your fucking hard hat in your hand :)

        3. Warm Braw Silver badge

          Try being a gay 17 year old working on a building site

          I seem to remember a Joe Gage documentary about something similar...

          Shame if they were to become a thing of the past.

        4. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Oh, hard hat in your hand... Sorry, I misread: as you were! ;-)

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Sound familiar - "Ah yes, I only read Playboy for the articles"

        Did read a very interesting article/interview in my father's Playboy with Brian Herbert discussing how Dune was being made into a film.

      6. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Men Only, Club and Mayfair were my preferences as a schoolkid. And there was a used bookshop where I lived that sold cheap back issues.

    3. caffeine addict Silver badge

      In a former life I worked for the company responsible for putting those magazines online.

      Razzle and Fiesta were always the low point in my month. Mayfair and Club International the high points.

      Of course, these were the days when the women in them still had some bush and "Shaven havens" was a fetish mag... *nostalgic sigh*

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Interestingly enough, women (and men) have removed body hair (yes pubic hair) for thousands of years.

        It goes back to long before the Roman Empire, in ancient Greece, the Egyptians and all over the middle east.

        So if keeping pubic hair is the oddity in civilised history, not the norm (then again so is men being unshaven)

        1. Rich 11 Silver badge

          Removing body hair wasn't a matter of perceived beauty in Ancient Egypt but done simply to avoid infestation by lice. That's why wigs were so commonplace, which were also drenched with perfume to keep the mosquitos and sand flies away.

          1. cutterman

            The shorn lamb

            Nothing to do with fleas or Egyptians or the Bible. Removing all body hair in women (and now men) is a multiBillion industry that was thought up to get even more money from the idiot population.

            Then you can sell them salves, aftershaves and soothing goop for the pimples and ingrown hairs and antibiotics for the infections. Transmission of herpes and molluscum contagiosum has soared and there are other viral nasties just waiting to jump from one raw mons to the other.

            When I was a lad, if it had hairs it was old enough - no wonder there are so many men fascinated by underage girls (and boys) .

            Money, money, money, money - certainly not health or comfort. Bloody silly.

            Mac

            1. Teiwaz Silver badge

              Re: The shorn lamb

              When I was a lad, if it had hairs it was old enough

              Well, that's a false guideline for a start....

              1. The Nazz Silver badge

                Re: The shorn lamb

                Absolutely, always wondered why my pet sheepdog was so nervous.

            2. Simon Harris Silver badge

              Re: The shorn lamb

              When I was a lad, if it had hairs it was old enough..

              If you're saying that under a title 'the shorn lamb', I can only assume you're Welsh.

            3. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: The shorn lamb

              The saying I heard was..

              "Grass on the wicket, old enough for cricket"

              and the slightly more distasteful..

              "Old enough to bleed, old enough to butcher"

              1. herman Silver badge

                Re: The shorn lamb

                Well, Mary had a little lamb...

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "[...] then again so is men being unshaven"

          The Greeks had beards. Evangelical Christians conveniently ignore the biblical ban on shaving and cutting hair in the Leviticus laws. Along with not eating pork or shellfish or wearing clothes of mixed fibres.

          1. arctic_haze Silver badge

            That was the decision of the first Apostles to make the Church appealing to non-Jews.

            It seems it turned out to be successful.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              "It seems it turned out to be successful."

              The Church soon forgot some of their Roman cultural changes in areas of sex and gender. Paul silenced the women preachers of his time - and women in church choirs until the 19th century. The latter led to tens of thousands of boys being castrated to produce a few mature castrati for the Church''s choirs - and endorsed the same provisions for the early opera companies.

              He also the forbade the Roman practice of same sex relationships. Jerome advocated starvation suicide instead of sex for young women.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          and women not shaving public hair only came about because some English Queen or other forebade any of her attendants or female members of the court from doing so, so as with many things it became "the correct thing to do"

          A bit like Barbara Castle making the speed limit 70mph as that was the top speed of most cars in the 1970s and its since been given a mythos that its an expertly chosen "safe" speed and any movement upwards will lead to millions of deaths.....

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            "A bit like Barbara Castle making the speed limit 70mph as that was the top speed of most cars in the 1970s"

            Not sure a Moggie could get much over 70mph - but that was a very old design by then. My Austin 1300 could easily get over 70mph. Minis certainly could too. Even my low compression engined Range Rover reached 90mph on a night-time deserted motorway - just to see how much contingency it would have in hand for overtaking.

            Even with modern pubic hair removal techniques there are injury risks. I gave up doing it because I am prone to ingrowing hairs afterwards. That seems to correlate with how curly your hair is naturally. Exfoliation can help prevent the problem for some people. Aesthetically many "smoothies" look like plucked chickens as their hair follicles are slightly raised.

          2. Wincerind

            "70mph as that was the top speed of most cars in the 1970s"

            Close but no cigar. The 70 mph speed limit was introduced in 1965

            1. Simon Harris Silver badge

              British cars of the 70s had a built in speed limiter.

              They fell to pieces if you drove them at 70mph.

              ok... they fell to pieces whatever speed you drove them.

  2. }{amis}{ Silver badge
    FAIL

    This was always May's toy

    So I expect it will be quietly dropped by whoever wins the big hat.

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: This was always May's toy

      Assuming it isn't the man-egg Javid*, whose idea it basically was in the first place.

      *It won't be, it'll be mini-Trump

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: This was always May's toy

        More likely the Home Office's so that accounts for both puppets, May and Javid.

      2. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: This was always May's toy

        May very much depend if Dr Robotnik stays on at the Home Office.

        1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: This was always May's toy

          Dr Robotnik, or Dizzy?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This was always May's toy

      IIRC Mindgeek's estimate of sign-ups in the first month was about half the UK's adult population. That's a huge number of people to annoy that any PM would want to avoid it. Doing it when half the population already hates your Brexit position is just crazy. (I wonder what the overlap is)

      If the pr0n block isn't cancelled it will be delayed until just after a general election. Unpopular stuff is best done just after a GE so it's forgotten about by the time the next one comes around.

      1. caffeine addict Silver badge

        Re: This was always May's toy

        The left has it's fair share of "won't somebody think of the children" while the right has "control everything". And both sides are quite noisy.

        See also, MPs on both ends admitting to taking drugs but rejecting any plans to decriminalise anything.

        1. Teiwaz Silver badge

          Re: This was always May's toy

          See also, MPs on both ends admitting to taking drugs but rejecting any plans to decriminalise anything.

          Or, it seems to step in over canabis oil prescription before some small child dies for want of it.

          1. CountCadaver

            Re: This was always May's toy

            The plan was always "look we've made it possible for doctors to prescribe it, but its still VERY VERY DANGEROUS stuff so its restricted to specialist Drs" (who are litigation phobic, extremely conservative in viewpoint and don't trust anything that hasn't been proven through studies conducted that they may or may not have had an interest in.)

            Basically pass the buck to someone else and avoid angering the armchair cols and the red tops by doing what Canada did in 2001 and making it available with a prescription from any Dr (worked well, who needed it could get it and the sky didn't fall - albeit Harper did try and push for heavier restrictions the usual Tory ban ban ban) or heck do what Canada did recently and legalise / tax it.....

          2. Muscleguy Silver badge

            Re: This was always May's toy

            It's an interesting area, it's supposed to be the canabidiol which is the active ingredient in preventing seizures. Except reading stuff recently it seems the sort with small amounts of THC are best but before too long the effects wear off and you need a version with more THC. This strongly suggests that THC is the active ingredient after all.

            Don't tell the Home Office but.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This was always May's toy

          "The left has it's fair share of "won't somebody think of the children" while the right has "control everything". "

          Both extremes are pretty much the same in their ideas of imposing social control. It is the centre that has learned to think about where the balances should be.

          1. Claverhouse Silver badge

            Re: This was always May's toy

            Really ? What centre would that be then ?

            1. BrownishMonstr

              Re: This was always May's toy

              The Great Blair. Oh, long live He, the Wise and All Knowing.

          2. CountCadaver

            Re: This was always May's toy

            I'm an extreme centerist, I support the military, strong prison sentences and law and order, however I also support welfare and increased payments for disability, with enhanced spending on the NHS. However I also want the government to stop trying to control what consenting adults do - legalise all drugs, no extreme pron laws, no CCTV cameras all over the place, no spying on everyone "just in case"

            I also think the state is too slow to help those made redundant, first thing that should happen is an assessment of work experience and transferable skills with advisors who are aware of local /regional vacancies with el gov leveraging links to industry instead of using the stick approach constantly.

          3. Teiwaz Silver badge

            Re: This was always May's toy

            Both extremes are pretty much the same in their ideas of imposing social control.

            A small step to far left or right leads to the same place, the political spectrum is curved.

            The safe part of the spectrum is more narrow than people realise.

            We walk on a knife edge.

            1. Kubla Cant Silver badge

              Re: This was always May's toy

              A small step to far left or right leads to the same place, the political spectrum is curved.

              It's at least two dimensions, not one. Left <-> Right* and Authoritarian <-> Libertarian.

              * or however you choose to define it

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This was always May's toy

        "IIRC Mindgeek's estimate of sign-ups in the first month was about half the UK's adult population. That's a huge number of people to annoy that any PM would want to avoid it."

        If the rumours are to be believed, there wasn't a lot of understanding amongst many of the MP's involved in this legislation over just how much of the population would be affected.

        Think the difference between regular users that may be on porn sites on a daily basis for an extended period of time ("clearly" a problem that politicians should address) and those that access the sites a couple of times a month. The first group largely consists of males under 25 that rarely vote while the second group likely contains more than half the UK voting population assuming the rest either don't visit the sites or use VPN's...

        Policy appears to have been set around the first group, but captures the second group and the penny has dropped within the Tories that while their maybe a chance of a post-Brexit political career, the chances of a post-porn law political career are zero.

        Particularly when <insert tabloid here> gets your web history because you used your parliamentary e-mail address and "iwillbepm" or "10downingst" as your password...

      3. Jamie Jones Silver badge

        Re: This was always May's toy

        IIRC Mindgeek's estimate of sign-ups in the first month was about half the UK's adult population.

        That's what was reported here, but that number is clearly bollocks.

        25 million?

        I'd guess they won't even make 25 thousand.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. MrNed

          Re: This was always May's toy

          I'd guess they won't even make 25 thousand.

          Yep, and the remaining 24,975,000 will just set up a VPN

          1. Teiwaz Silver badge

            Re: This was always May's toy

            I'd guess they won't even make 25 thousand.

            Yep, and the remaining 24,975,000 will just set up a VPN

            I'm not even sure the masses of the mostly computer illiterate will manage that. It'll sound too complicated and scary.

            If they don't think twice about unwise tweets or sharing everything on FB, they'll not for the pron signup.

            Or they'll just not (and possibly bottle it up). Another social safety valve gets wrenched shut.

            1. Adrian 4 Silver badge

              Re: This was always May's toy

              "I'm not even sure the masses of the mostly computer illiterate will manage that. It'll sound too complicated and scary."

              Of course they will. It will be called 'facebook private' or somesuch : leaks data to FB, takes no setup, works via the social media exemption.

    3. Claverhouse Silver badge

      Re: This was always May's toy

      Yet before that the darling toy of the Demon Butler, her beloved master.

      He may have contemplated excluding farmers' magazines of animal husbandry bent.

    4. vtcodger Silver badge

      Re: This was always May's toy

      Just curious. I know that the UK is a large diverse entity. And I know that people are quite diverse and hold a wide range of really odd views. But does anyone over there actually believe that an age verification block will somehow dissuade kids from viewing pornography? Having had some experience observing kids using computers, let me assure you folks that the first juvenile to figure out how to bypass the block -- which should take no more than five minutes from the time the block is imposed -- will post full and accurate instructions on the bypass procedure on social media sites within a hour. Probably 40% of the underage population will know one or more bypass methods within a day. The rest will take a few days longer.

      Actually, I'm having trouble imagining a better way to encourage the viewing of pornography by children than an attempt to block it.

      1. BebopWeBop Silver badge

        Re: This was always May's toy

        And that diversity, of course, includes the stupid, the uninformed ad the religious zealots (of all creeds although the Christians and the Muslims appear to be the worst).

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This was always May's toy

          You are assuming the religious zealots done watching it.

      2. MrNed

        Re: This was always May's toy

        But does anyone over there actually believe that an age verification block will somehow dissuade kids from viewing pornography?

        What, other than the MPs? Nope - nobody. It's just another farce brought to you by UK PLC.

        Anyway, minitrump looks like he's going to be the next PM, and he gives the distinct impression of being a complete and utter onanist, so don't expect to see this back before the loons' gallery anytime soon.

      3. Aussie Doc
        Pint

        Re: This was always May's toy

        I agree - tell them "don't look" is bound to increase the 'lookers'.

        I wonder, will the UK also make it 'illegal' (or just plain naughty) for Computer Magazines or websites to show/tell how to bypass such checks?

        Will they try and 'clamp down' on (anti)social media posts who try and share such info?

        I need a drink whilst I watch the little lights on my VPN shine.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This was always May's toy

          Only if they wish to block foreign media sites and messaging such as WhatsApp. Wouldn't put it past them to try though.

  3. Dan 55 Silver badge

    The party of business

    Those ID companies that were going to sell a wank pass in newsagents will be happy, they've probably got a warehouse full of cards made already that they don't know what to do with.

    1. caffeine addict Silver badge

      Re: The party of business

      They'll just find a rubbish tip and toss them off...

      1. Rande Knight

        Re: The party of business

        Hopefully they'll store them in a basement for 50 years and when they come out, they'll be humourous collectors items like the 'Keep Calm and Carry On' posters.

    2. bazbt3

      Re: The party of business

      Good point. This alongside the millions wasted on buying cross-Channel ferry capacity and the bills for legal actions implies there's more than one government department unable to set up what should be a 'simple' thing.

      I've tried every few weeks to sign up with one of the services, which remains unavailable in the UK. Say the 'crats get their act together* and roll out this harebrained scheme, I'd bet electronic sign-up will only be available on the go-live day. With half the UK population scrambling for either VPNs or signing up to ID services, it won't be pretty.

      *Unintentional.

      1. MonkeyCee Silver badge

        Re: The party of business

        "This alongside the millions wasted "

        This is a conservative government. Any wealth transfer to the private sector is part of the plan. Getting something for it is just a nice bonus.

  4. KOST

    My first thought when I saw these reports earlier was that someone at the BBFC had put their credit card details into the test system and they'd already been stolen.

    1. katrinab Silver badge

      Someone at the Guardian put 4929 1234 5678 9015 as their credit card number, with a random CCV and expiry date, and it worked

      4929 - is one of the ranges of numbers owned by Barclaycard, the largest credit card provider in the UK.

      1234 5678 901 - is a string of random numbers

      5 - is the correct check digit for the numbers previously chosen.

      1. Disgusted of Cheltenham

        1234 5678 901 - is a string of random numbers

        It may be an arbitrary choice, but it doesn't look remotely random.

        1. Mage Silver badge
          Boffin

          re: doesn't look remotely random

          Here's a random number: 6

          Random numbers are very very curious animals. Even more so is a random walk, like how many times in a row a number comes up on a die, or how many throws don't have a 6.

          You need a lot of trials with a genuinely random generator.

          Probability and Statistics are not intuitive.

          1234 5678 901 may not look random to a sentient being. But it could be the output of a random generator. It will be EVENTUALLY.

          You could even get it twice in a row, though the odds are low.

          1. Kubla Cant Silver badge

            Re: re: doesn't look remotely random

            Dilbert visits the random number generator

        2. katrinab Silver badge

          It is as random as any of the 100bn other possible combinations.

          Which is not important for the purpose of this discussion anyway.

          The point is

          Pick a valid 4 digit bank prefix - 4929 is Barclays, I picked on them because they are the biggest, you can pick another bank prefix if you want, but not any random number. Pedants will note that there are other 4 digit prefixes that are also Barclays, from acquisitions of other banks. Again, not important, but you can of course use one of them if you want.

          Pick an 11 digit random number - 1234 5678 901 is a placeholder for any number you want

          Calculate the correct check digit for the 15 digits, or start at 0 and keep changing it until you get one that works.

          You now have a credit card number that can be used for age verification.

          1. Mage Silver badge

            re: credit card number that can be used for age verification

            I'm puzzled that anyone thinks that can work.

      2. Milton Silver badge

        4929 1234 5678 9015

        We see what you did there ;-)

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Anonymous Authentication doesn't exist

    So with Age-Verification checks, Big Boris is Watching You.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Anonymous Authentication doesn't exist

      "Big Boris is Watching You."

      Now that's a kink!

  7. Spasticus Autisticus
    Facepalm

    Hilfuckinglarious! What a bunch of useless counts.

    Why is there a red line across the screen? Its even a bit wavy.

  8. chivo243 Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    Who could've known

    Raise your hand, I know the other is busy!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who could've known

      Your chosen icon isn't that exciting.

  9. thosrtanner
    Thumb Up

    Don't you love the EU?

    Saving us from insane politicians even after we're meant to have left

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Don't you love the EU?

      Nothing can save us from insane politicians.

      But the EU made us do it-

      https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/protection-minors-avmsd

      Article 12

      Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that on-demand audiovisual media services provided by media service providers under their jurisdiction which might seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors are only made available in such a way as to ensure that minors will not normally hear or see such on-demand audiovisual media services.

      And as AVMSD is a directive, member states must comply.. At least until November. Post Brexit, we may still have to comply to protect the morals of any EU citizens still living in the UK.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge
        Stop

        Re: Don't you love the EU?

        Article 12 only applies to TV and on-demand services. source

        Age rating in the guide data over DVB (there's a field for it) with TV parental controls turned on (most smart TVs have them), and parental controls for Amazon/Netflix et al apps (which already exist) and Bob's your uncle. I.e. it's already done.

        Nowhere does it mention protection of minors with regards to websites.

        This is not the EU's fault... yet again.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Don't you love the EU?

          Nowhere does it mention protection of minors with regards to websites.

          Did you read it?

          The AudioVisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) covers all services with audiovisual content irrespective of the technology used to deliver the content. The rules apply whether you watch news or other audiovisual content on TV, on the Internet, on cable or on your mobile device...

          ...On-demand services (non-linear services)

          Programmes users select from a catalogue offered by the media service provider, to watch at their own convenience.

          Rules in the Directive that apply to on-demand services only (Chapter IV):

          Protection of minors (Article 12)

          General promotion and distribution of European works (Article 13)

          I guess you could argue that a porn site that only offeres still images would not constitute a 'programme', but videos do meet that definition.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: Don't you love the EU?

            Are a porn site or YouTube really the same as Netflix and Amazon Prime?

            Audiovisual media services are:

            [...]

            under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider – meaning they control the selection and organisation of the programmes.

            I really doubt it.

            Also:

            If [emphasis on if] a country objects to the content of a foreign television broadcast wholly or mostly targeted at it, it can ask the authorities in the broadcast’s country of origin to issue a non-binding request for the broadcaster to comply with the rules of the targeted country. Factors determining whether a country is “targeted” include: origin of advertising or subscription revenues, main language, targeted advertising, etc.

            If the broadcaster circumvents the objecting country’s rules, the authorities there can impose binding restrictions – with the Commission’s prior approval, and provided the measures are solely a response to the circumvention. Binding measures could include banning: retransmission (cable, terrestrial, IPTV) advertising for the broadcasts or programmes advertising of local companies (under own jurisdiction) publication in printed or electronic programme guides sale of subscriptions/smart cards for pay-TV

            The porn ban seems very much 'over and above' what this directive states.

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: Don't you love the EU?

              The porn ban seems very much 'over and above' what this directive states.

              That's often the problem with EU Diktats.. They can be a bit vague. So the preamble defines content that sounds like pron. ATVOD fined Playboy on that basis. You could argue that Playboy is/was a 'channel' or a 'broadcaster', but it's still AV content. And you can argue that other pron sites control the selection and organisation of their content, but they certainly are VOD services, thus in the scope of that Directive. And I'm also guess it's why DCMS is seeking approval.

              (I also suspect AV Directives are why the BBC's so anti-Brexit given post-Brexit, all their operations in the EU would fall into foreign owned and more regulated/restricted than they are now.)

              1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                That's often the problem with EU Diktats.. They can be a bit vague.

                Something to do with national sovereignty perhaps?

                And I'm also guess it's why DCMS is seeking approval.

                They can't seek approval for "SELECT domain_name FROM internet WHERE content_type = 'porn'" though. They have to give a specific name and seek approval every time, probably to stop it being abused.

                And I guess that's what they've just worked out this week.

              2. Stork Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                Mrs/Mr. Eel: how about a reality check?

                - have you heard of any other EU country preparing similar legislation? I haven't. If it was due to a push from EU, UK would not be the only place working on these things.

                - have you seen any reference to EU during the drafting and parliamentary discussions of the legislation? Any comment from UKIP, ERG or others defending the ancient British freedom to wank? I haven't.

                EU is at times meddling with things it did not need to, but this legislation you can blame on your own wankers. Perhaps to do with the peculiar British (political) obsession with sex.

                1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                  Re: Don't you love the EU?

                  Mrs/Mr. Eel: how about a reality check?

                  I'd prefer a large cheque, but I'm not a registered lobbyist.

                  - have you heard of any other EU country preparing similar legislation? I haven't. If it was due to a push from EU, UK would not be the only place working on these things.

                  I haven't really looked. But the way this works is the EU issues a Directive, then it's up to the individual member states to implement locally (unless they have an exemption) or face large fines.

                  - have you seen any reference to EU during the drafting and parliamentary discussions of the legislation? Any comment from UKIP, ERG or others defending the ancient British freedom to wank? I haven't.

                  Have you looked? I'm guessing there's probably somethingi in Hansard during the drafting, otherwise if you looked at Part 3 of the Digital Economy Act (2017) says-

                  Regulations 17 to 20 and 22 of the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive)Regulations 2002 (S.I. 2002/2013) apply in relation to this Part, despiteregulation 3(2) of those Regulations

                  Which references this SI-

                  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2013/regulation/2/made

                  Which says-

                  “the Directive” means Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce)(1);

                  You'll see how this works, ie primary legislation referring to secondary, which referes to EU directives.. And makes me wish for hyperlinking in the government texts so it's easier to track related Acts or SIs.

                  Which is also why it's going to be a bit of a ballache for civil servants to track down all the EU related provisions in legislation and amend or repeal.. or even create new legislation. Which potentially means a large slab of new SIs that the 650 MPs would (ok, should) read, digest and vote on.. if only to stop things being snuck in. Especially as most SIs get waved through. Also expect MPs to demand huge pay rises to compensate for the additional work.

                  As for why it's not really being talked about.. Most people don't really care, and as it's based on 2010 and older Directives, most of the lobbying and politicing was done a long time ago. And as for Cameron and manifest destiny.. I mean committments, that was simple politicing. Promise something that might get Mumsnet votes & the winning goverment would have to implement anyway.

                  (if I'm bored tomorrow, I may poke around Hansard and DCMS stuff to see if I can find a better match to the Directive requirements, and UK legislation. I have insomnia, and trawling through this stuff helps me sleep..)

            2. caffeine addict Silver badge

              Re: Don't you love the EU?

              If youtube (or the porn equivalents) aren't "on demand" I don't know what is.

              Technically, how does browsing Youtube differ from iPlayer?

              1. Rich 11 Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                Technically, how does browsing Youtube differ from iPlayer?

                One is 90% full of shit and the other is 40% full of shit.

                Oh, technically? Beyond caring.

                1. iron Silver badge

                  Re: Don't you love the EU?

                  I'd peg those figures at 95% and 99% respectively but YMMV.

              2. Dan 55 Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                Try uploading your cat videos to iPlayer.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Don't you love the EU?

                  Try uploading your cat videos to iPlayer.

                  Can't have pussy action on iPlayer - Yours Mrs Slocombe

              3. Andy The Hat Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                I would suggest that Youtube and iPlayer differ in the key respect of editorial control. The BBC produce, publish and control the content of iPlayer. Facebook/Youtube certainly don't produce, theoretically don't control and they would probably argue that they don't publish (in the 'taking any sort of responsibility' sense) what's delivered through their site.

                1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                  Re: Don't you love the EU?

                  I would suggest that Youtube and iPlayer differ in the key respect of editorial control.

                  I just found this handy explanation-

                  https://www.stewartslaw.com/news/new-audiovisual-media-services-directive-and-brexit/

                  Which explains that previous EU diktat (ie 2010) created exclusions for YT (and large pron distributors), which were closed in the 2018 version. And member states have until 2020 to implement it, or else large fines. It may be other member states are watching (and laughing at) the UK's attempts to implement this before doing their own thing. It also comments on the possible impact of Brexit.

                  1. NeilPost Bronze badge

                    Re: Don't you love the EU?

                    It’s still only says protect minors from bad content. It does not oblige to have a dodgy age verification system.

                    However a quick aeaexh brings this ip that AhrID already exists in Germany from Mindgeek. Guess if protects Germany’s youth from German Granny Action :-)

                    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_verification_system

                    World’d first my ass

                    https://www.ageid.com/why-ageid

              4. Cuddles Silver badge

                Re: Don't you love the EU?

                "If youtube (or the porn equivalents) aren't "on demand" I don't know what is.

                Technically, how does browsing Youtube differ from iPlayer?"

                Technically? Probably not in any significant way. That's not what's important here. As Dan55 quoted above:

                "under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider – meaning they control the selection and organisation of the programmes"

                iPlayer is a curated service offering only a limited number of selected programs. YouTube, and porn equivalents, allow anyone to upload anything they want with no editorial input. The technical side of delivering the service may be the same, but the service itself is very different as far as regulation is concerned.

                1. fandom

                  Re: Don't you love the EU?

                  Youtube is increasingly curated.

                  And it has had a ban on porn since the start

          2. katrinab Silver badge

            Re: Don't you love the EU?

            Sky Broadband Shield and similar from other providers complies with that requirement. I turned it off

            1. CountCadaver

              Re: Don't you love the EU?

              just wait until the govt demands sky create a big brother to go along with its new "sky buddy - click here to turn off your kids internet"

              Mr X has been a very bad boy espousing all these disruptive views online, no internet for you

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Don't you love the EU?

            "Did you read it?"

            Keep reading.

            ---

            "Audiovisual media services

            Audiovisual media services are:

            - television broadcasts;

            - content selected by viewers ("on-demand") over an electronic communications network (typically Connected TV sets, mobile devices or the internet) for watching at a time of their choice;

            - audiovisual advertising

            More specifically, such content is provided:

            - commercially (not on private individuals' websites).

            - for the general public (not including any form of private correspondence).

            - as a programme (not including websites containing ancillary audiovisual elements such as graphical elements or short adverts).

            - under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider – meaning they control the selection and organisation of the programmes."

            ---

            I think it's fairly clear they're referring to television broadcasts, while ensuring the manner in which those broadcasts are consumed doesn't matter so including online catchup and streaming services.

            Even if that's not the case, not sure how you'd fit most porn sites within the "as a programme" category. And any free porn sites are in the clear with the "commercially" bit.

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: Don't you love the EU?

              Even if that's not the case, not sure how you'd fit most porn sites within the "as a programme" category. And any free porn sites are in the clear with the "commercially" bit.

              Programme is defined in the Directive-

              (b) ‘programme’ means a set of moving images with or without sound constituting an individual item within a schedule or a catalogue established by a media service provider and the form and content of which are comparable to the form and content of television broadcasting.

              Then gives some examples. So pop over to a pron site, choose from their catalogue* or check their schedule for live streams, and enjoy. And 'free' doesn't really matter. MindGeek's commercial, ITV is free, both rely on advertising and content sales to make money.

              I think there's also some precedents, ie because the Directive specifies rules for product placement, YT creators now need to state where that, or sponsorship is happening.

              *Soo.. If the category (or programme) is hot swedish lesbians, how much of this section-

              audiovisual commercial communications shall not:

              ...include or promote any discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, nationality, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation;

              is violated?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Don't you love the EU?

        "seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors"

        Who decides what is moral?

        I think a healthy sex life is important.

        I think the ability to accept others choices is important.

        I don't see any consensual sex as immoral, I believe we all have the right to indulge our fantasy as long as no one is harmed.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Don't you love the EU?

          Who decides what is moral?

          Nanny knows best. Or politicians. Which in EU terms means various christian groupings that dominate it, ie Germany's CDU and other members of the EPP. It's a bit like the US, where minors are ok to watch shootings, stabbings, heads exploding etc but not nipples.

        2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Don't you love the EU?

          >"seriously impair the physical, ....development of minors"

          What if you used both hands alternately to build up both biceps ?

        3. Claverhouse Silver badge

          Re: Don't you love the EU?

          Up to a point, Lord Copper.

          Whilst in general not giving a toss what other people do, I did once find a text story as sex fantasy in which a mother set her son on fire with a lighter.

          I would agree with the compulsory withdrawal of all fire-making implements from anyone whose such proclivities were, however accidentally, discovered.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Don't you love the EU?

        "And as AVMSD is a directive, member states must comply.."

        You need to stop getting your news from Nigel Farage!

        AVMSD and the EU has nothing to do with the current Porn Block/Age verification law. The age verification thing was part of the Digital Economy Act which was passed by parliament in April 2017. It was a pet project of David Cameron and was in the conservatives election manifesto in 2015. AVMSD didn't become an EU directive until November 2018. If anything they probably just got the idea from us!

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Don't you love the EU?

          You need to stop getting your news from Nigel Farage!

          Hmm.. who should I trust, and MEP who knows the inner workings, or the BBC, who's demonstrated considerable bias against Brexit, and is/will be heavily impacted by the EU's AV Directives. But the fun started here-

          https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32010L0013&from=EN#d1e2126-1-1

          DIRECTIVE 2010/13/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

          of 10 March 2010

          on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive)

          and lead to the creation of ATVOD in the UK, and our local interpretations of that Directive, ie UK Acts.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Don't you love the EU?

            "[...] and MEP who knows the inner workings [...]"

            As far as I can tell Farage apparently made a virtue of having very little to do with the job's responsibilities - while drawing his pay checks and building up his pension pot.

          2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Re: Don't you love the EU?

            and [sic] MEP who knows the inner workings has the worst attendance record and misspends EU funds

            FTFY

      4. Simon Harris Silver badge

        Re: Don't you love the EU?

        might seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors are only made available in such a way as to ensure that minors will not normally hear or see such on-demand audiovisual media services.

        That should put a stop to non-stop Tellytubbies (other mind numbing cartoons are available) on Netflix.

  10. alain williams Silver badge

    "the holdup is due to DCMS having failed to notify the European Commission in time"

    Oh, they must be in the room next door to the plonkers who changed the date of next year's May day bank holiday at 11 months notice and then either show stupid they are (or just lie) by saying that they had "considered the practical implications of moving this bank holiday".

    They have no idea how the real world works or, perhaps, do not care.

    Tossers.

    1. Bloodbeastterror

      Re: "the holdup is due to DCMS having failed to notify the European Commission in time"

      Oh come on now. They couldn't possibly have known in advance that the 75th anniversary would fall on a Friday...

      1. Disgusted of Cheltenham

        Re: "the holdup is due to DCMS having failed to notify the European Commission in time"

        The 50th was on a Monday, and what would have been the first May 1 bank holiday to be on May 1 was switched to Monday 8th. Perhaps you should put 100th in the diary now; banks may be a thing of the past by then, but I imagine we'll still want the holidays.

    2. Jamie Jones Silver badge

      Re: "the holdup is due to DCMS having failed to notify the European Commission in time"

      Thanks for those links - I hadn't heard of that.

      Blimey, why not just make the Friday an extra holiday?

  11. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    There's something I don't get

    "the holdup is due to DCMS having failed to notify the European Commission in time"

    Why is that a problem ? Is the UK not leaving the EU any more ?

    I find it hilariously stupid that the EU is still being bandied about as a restriction to what UK Gov can do now. You're leaving, so what do you care about notifying the Commission ?

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: There's something I don't get

      In case you hadn't been paying attention, that "leaving the EU" thing isn't going quite as brilliantly as those cheerleading for it had promised. Might have something to do with nobody agreeing in advance exactly what variation of "leaving the EU" we were going to go for, and then not being able to agree after the public had individually voted for 17 million different versions of it.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: There's something I don't get

        "Might have something to do with nobody agreeing in advance exactly what variation of "leaving the EU" we were going to go for"

        With the result of the vote, it was never going to be easy or even viable. No hard Brexit is shitting on a significant portion of Brexiteers. But leaving with no deal, a poor deal (or in fact any deal) is shitting on 48% of voters who don't want to leave in the first place. There is simply NO WAY of exiting the EU in way that will please a majority.

        The whole referendum was flawed right from the start when it was defined as advisory (but we will take the result as gospel anyway, no matter what) and most particularly that they went with "first past the post" with such a life changing vote. It was close, and could easily have been closer, possibly as close as a single vote between Brexit or Remain.

        1. MonkeyCee Silver badge

          Re: There's something I don't get

          "There is simply NO WAY of exiting the EU in way that will please a majority."

          Bugger even pleasing a majority. Most don't seem to even have a clue about how to exit, what that means next, and having anything resembling a plan for it.

          May's deal involves settling a few areas which are already pretty clear, going on existing treaties seperate to the EU. There is nothing that contentious in it, guaranteeing citizens rights and the Good Friday accords would seem pretty basic. But it is only an agreement to then go on and negotiate the bulk of the details that the UK and the EU might not quite agree on.

          No deal is much the same. The UK can leave, and then immediately enter the same sort of trade negotiations, just with the whole world at once.

          Either way, most of the negotiating with the EU is still ahead, followed by (or simultaneously) negotiating with the rest of the world.

          Seeing as neither Parliament or the two major parties can decide on a position, I'm lost as to why we're plowing on.

          1. Rich 11 Silver badge

            Re: There's something I don't get

            I'm lost as to why we're plowing on.

            Pride. How many politicians like admitting they made a mistake? The only good thing about this whole sorry business is the impending meltdown of the Conservative party, and even then there's a risk of it being replaced by something worse. In two years' time we could find ourselves looking back to the halcyon days of John Major's Cones Hotline with a wistful tear in our collective eye.

            1. ArrZarr Silver badge
              Unhappy

              Re: There's something I don't get

              If the Tories collapse, that will leave only Labour, an even worse choice.

              I was going to try and say something pithy about the second worst party letting the worst party in, but then i remembered that UKIP and NEWKIP exist and are even worse and just felt depressed.

              1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                Re: There's something I don't get

                If the Tories collapse, that will leave only Labour, an even worse choice.

                [Citation Required]

                Don't get me wrong - most politicians are as bad as each other, but I don't think even the previous Labour government with its authoritarianist data fetishism and ID cards was as bad as the current bunch of bottom-feeders in terms of this sort of thing.

                In general, socialist policies tend to be more socially liberal than conservative ones. Corbyn is hated by the press, and some of his thinking does appear to be a bit... "interesting"... however, he's nowhere near as hard-left as the UK press would have you think (a lot of his proposed policies are just standard socialist fare, found in a lot of first world countries, you know, crazy shit like havig vital infrastructure in public not private hands, that sort of thing). His biggest problem is that thing where he promised he'd listen to his party members and then totally ignored them when the overwhelming consensus within the party is to take an anti-brexit stance, to the extent of having motions passed at party conference that get completely forgotten about.

                Anyway, if Labour get in, Corbyn won't be leader for long. He and his hard-left cronies will get the boot as soon as he tries to do a lexit.

                1. Rich 11 Silver badge

                  Re: There's something I don't get

                  His biggest problem is that thing where he promised he'd listen to his party members and then totally ignored them

                  Yep, that's the one that pisses me off the most. Holding policy conventions was a damn good idea, and potentially a very good way of getting the Blairites and Corbynites to bury the hatchet because it'd let them both save face while getting some of the things each wanted and compromising on the others. We wouldn't be half as deep in this Brexit shit if he'd carried out his promise and taken a policy agreement to the 2017 party conference.

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: There's something I don't get

                  " His biggest problem is that thing where he promised he'd listen to his party members and then totally ignored them [...]"

                  Totally expected behaviour from Corbyn. From his past it appears he has no concept of compromise - just his own unshakeable belief that whatever he thinks is always right. His inner circle echo chamber wants him that way too.

                  1. The Nazz Silver badge

                    Re: There's something I don't get

                    What a dilemma?

                    General consensus has it that if we leave without a deal, the country and economy is fucked.

                    Labour and Corbyn get in and the country and economy is well and truly fucked. Except that Sturgeon is orgasmic (NOTHING to do with me.)

          2. NeilPost Bronze badge

            Re: There's something I don't get

            If you are bored by Brexit now and the government home it is wasting..... wait until (if!) we leave......

            Brenda in Bristol be-warned.

        2. NeilPost Bronze badge

          Re: There's something I don't get

          A hard Brexit will shit on 100% of the UK population (and a large number of our dear friends in Eire).

          - The Rich will be immune to it

          - Brexit zealots seem to want a poo-party

          - Brexit ignorants will scream

          - Remainers will roll their eyes that they told you so

          - Undecideds or non-voters will go WTF

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: There's something I don't get

      It's a bit like doing 60 just before you leave a 30 limit - there are still laws in place that could result in penalties.

    3. mark l 2 Silver badge

      Re: There's something I don't get

      Well considering the badly thought out wont someone think of the children p0rn law was supposed to go live in July, and we are currently in the EU until 31st Oct. Then we still have to abide by EU rules and regulations whether we are leaving or not.

      If you hand in your notice at work you can't expect to be able to go around breaking company rules and say 'its ok I am leaving in 2 months so I don't need to follow the rules anymore'

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: There's something I don't get

        Good point. Assuming we end up with some sort of deal, then it's highly likely that if the deal resembles the current one on the table, there will be a 12-24 month transition period where very little will change anyway.

      2. Omgwtfbbqtime Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: There's something I don't get

        If you hand in your notice at work you can't expect to be able to go around breaking company rules and say 'its ok I am leaving in 2 months so I don't need to follow the rules anymore'

        No - you would go around breaking company rules saying "What are you going to do? Fire me?"

        Remember - once your notice is in, you decide when you start work!

        1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: There's something I don't get

          No - you would go around breaking company rules saying "What are you going to do? Fire me?"

          I think the response you would probably get to that would be along the lines of, "Garden leave, with immediate effect, with no pay for your notice period because you have breached the terms of your contract of employment. Good luck signing on."

          1. The Nazz Silver badge

            Re: There's something I don't get

            Generally speaking, most people who have given their notice have another, presumably better, job/position lined up, with an employer who's keen for them to start as soon as possible. So why the signing on?

          2. Omgwtfbbqtime Silver badge

            Re: There's something I don't get

            "Garden leave, with immediate effect, with no pay for your notice period …"

            And the HR drone says "Argh! no that's constructive dismissal, we have to go through the full disciplinary procedure! oh and by the way, for putting the company in this position, you are invited to your own disciplinary."

            Garden leave on full pay is a different matter entirely.

      3. Teiwaz Silver badge

        Re: There's something I don't get

        Then we still have to abide by EU rules and regulations whether we are leaving or not.

        Hello?

        Aspects of the UKs RIPA surveilance act struck down by EC court.

        Unlike us poor benighted (and unknighted) individuals, govs can decide to ignore some judgements but not, it appears, others...

        But bureaucracy trumps everything and seemingly 'permission to block some porn please' is more important than even potential Human Rights abuses.

    4. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: There's something I don't get

      There is also another option, which is that they've realised quite how impractical the whole idea is (quelle fucking surprise), but rather than admit to having committed to a political idea without thinking about how to implement it (I'm sure I can't think of an example of this happening in UK politics recently), they're instead pushing the blame on that nasty EU and all it's pesky regulations.

      1. Augie
        Gimp

        Re: There's something I don't get

        Or, perhaps they have realised that they have about as much respect from the general public as Jimmy and Rolf...

      2. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: There's something I don't get

        It'd be interesting to find out who realised the EU hadn't been notified.

        I.e. the nasty EU telling the plucky UK what to do or someone in Whitehall saying "oh no, I've just realised we've forgot to send this fax, we've got to bring it all to a halt, bury it, and never speak of it ever again".

      3. Jellied Eel Silver badge

        Re: There's something I don't get

        they're instead pushing the blame on that nasty EU and all it's pesky regulations.

        So if this is a purely national/sovereign matter, why would we have to delay implementation, or seek approval from the EU?

        1. Rich 11 Silver badge

          Re: There's something I don't get

          Because there's an entirely separate law regarding the way that standards are set out. Notification is a necessary part of enabling all EU companies to tender across the single market.

    5. Lee D Silver badge

      Re: There's something I don't get

      You're still bound by EU law right up until the second you actually bother to leave.

      We haven't left. We've handed in our notice. If we decide to break the company rules, we still get in trouble for it.

      No different to when people broke the law *before* the law changed - as the law stood at the date you committed the offence, you broke that law, and are tried under that law as it was written on that day.

      And until we do *actually* leave, thumbing our nose at the EU is only ever going to cause more problems than can be solved by a bit of British snobbery. For a start... everything that we do that's "illegal" before we leave, we can be tied up in lawsuit for the next 10 years trying to solve - Brexit won't affect that one bit because the act was illegal at the time it was executed.

      If we are *legally* required to notify the European Commission, it's the height of stupidity not to do so, especially if we then expect to re-negotiate any deal whatsoever.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I knew this would come to a head...

    So to speak.

  13. molletts

    "Just plain unpractical"?

    Impractical, shirley?

    1. Spoonsinger

      Re: Impractical Shirley

      One of those "specialist" porn actresses?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Impractical Shirley

        Like Bridgette the midget?

        1. MrBanana

          Re: Impractical Shirley

          Bridgette? No, obviously not her.

          Wait.... I've said too much.

  14. jason 7 Silver badge

    Never happen...

    ...like Brexit.

    Delay...then delay....then delay...then...

    1. Kevin Johnston

      Re: Never happen...

      Better that than premature ejection

      from website authentication

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Age of Consent

    I'm sure it's been mentioned before but anyone who has passed their 16th birthday can get up to all sorts of "naughty" things*. They just won't be able to watch others doing the same things until they have their 18th birthday

    *There are a few restrictions who they can do "naughty" things with.

    1. Mr Humbug

      Re: Age of Consent

      Also, they are not allowed to record themselves doing those "naughty" things.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Age of Consent

        "Also, they are not allowed to record themselves doing those "naughty" things."

        IIRC if they are in Northern Ireland and are a married heterosexual couple then it is not illegal. Not sure if a Civil Partnership has the same age provision.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Age of Consent

        Completely agree!

        Decent sex education is important, and IMHO that should include actually watching the act..

        I've no idea if sex ed has changed much since the 90's but honestly the cartoon drawings we were shown seriously did not help a man know what a woman really looks like naked, that would have been helpful!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Age of Consent

          "[...] since the 90's but honestly the cartoon drawings we were shown seriously did not help a man know what a woman really looks like naked, that would have been helpful!"

          That was an improvement on the zero sex education for most boys in the 1950/early60s. Even the available wind-blown playground pr0n was only "Health and Efficiency". Pictures in shades of grey - with women's areola/nipples and pubic areas blanked to the same flat grey. It was the early 1970s before Mayfair showed them - and finally Penthouse hit the clinical limits with "beaver" shots of labia.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Age of Consent

        "marry (with parental consent)"

        Scotland has it own legal system that allows marriage at 16 without parental consent. Hence the elopements to be married in Gretna Green in the old days.

        Northern Ireland also has its own legal system - hence their illiberal laws on many human rights that otherwise exist in the rest of the entity GB&NI that is conflated with the UK..

      3. Claverhouse Silver badge

        Re: Age of Consent

        The rationale is that after 25, you're dead anyway. Youth has flown.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Age of Consent

          "The rationale is that after 25, you're dead anyway. Youth has flown."

          Jenny Agutter still looked pretty good to me at 24***

          ***Yes - termination in the the book was 21 and the film raised that to 30.

  16. adam payne Silver badge

    Age-verification providers and the Open Rights Group (ORG) recently called for a mandatory certification from the regulator, saying the proposed voluntary scheme fell short in meeting adequate standards of cybersecurity and data protection

    current guidance on security, encryption, pseudonymisation and data retention in the standard (PDF) – published in April – is vague and imprecise, and often refers to generic "industry standards" without explanation.

    It sounds like the whole process has been badly thought out. Who would have thought that would be the case?!?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "industry standards"

      In our sector, we make all the information we hold publicly available in an unencrypted form.

      Will that do?

    2. Carpet Deal 'em Bronze badge
      Trollface

      What do you expect when they're trying to come up with policy whilest typing it up one-handed?

  17. steviebuk Silver badge

    What a prized.....

    ...cock

    "Age verification for online pornography needs to happen and I believe it is the clear will of the House and those we represent that it should, and in the clear interests of our children that it must."

    Not up to you to save "The children" parents can do that themselves. Besides, this will save no one. Magazines still exist. VPN still exists. The same very penis will probably say "Next, we will be looking to ban VPNs".

    Tools. What a waste of pissing money. This is what annoys me most. Someone has clearly lobbied this and they've obviously ignored all technical sense on why this is pointless and waste of money. Yet because some clueless cunts have said "Think of the children. If you don't push this through, me and all my friends will campaign to vote you out". And that's all the PMs care about. They don't care that it's a waste of time and money, they just want to keep their PM job.

    Cock.

  18. MrXavia

    "for age verification to come into force as soon as possible to ensure children are protected from pornographic material they should not see."

    Do they realise this will not stop kids from seeing porn?

    If they want to see it, they will see it..

    They'll use a proxy, or a VPN, borrow an older mates age verification, fake their age (plenty of ways to produce a fake ID)

    The smart kids bypass it easily, and they show the dumb ones how to do it...

    What was really needed was regulations to make it hard to accidentally stumble upon porn, and that is search engine regulation.

    1. tip pc Bronze badge

      "What was really needed was regulations to make it hard to accidentally stumble upon porn, and that is search engine regulation."

      i think we need some kind of website resolution regulation, not search engine regulation.

      everyone uses dns to resolve the web address, if users where pointed at age appropriate DNS then they would never see bad websites and the problem would be largely avoided.

      in fact just make sure kids are always supervised when online and these and other problems go away.

    2. Simon Harris Silver badge

      "for age verification to come into force as soon as possible to ensure children are protected from pornographic material they should not see."

      Let's assume it was completely successful (stop laughing at the back) and kids were blocked from seeing any online pornographic material from the web; kids will always be curious to see such stuff so I suspect some enterprising individuals (even the kids themselves) will do it 'off grid' as it were and we would see a significant increase in sexting and other activity between kids - probably "the one thing we didn't want to happen" (c) BrassEye.

  19. Ian Emery Silver badge

    So, red faces all around - at least until they stop us watching pron.

    I bet he feels a right prick.

    Then a left prick.

    Then a ................

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge

      in, out, in, out

      you shake it all about

  20. tip pc Bronze badge

    Government mistake for not brexiting in March

    "I apologise to them all for the fact that a mistake has been made which means these measures will not be brought into force as soon as they and I would like."

    If we had left the EU in March then the EU would not have needed to be informed, the mistake is surely believing that when TM repeatedly said over 100 times we'd be leaving in March 2019, we'd actually be leaving. Shame on the DCMS to believe government statements on future arrangements. The departments last paragraph looks like a mistake too.

    1. MonkeyCee Silver badge

      Re: Government mistake for not brexiting in March

      "If we had left the EU in March then the EU would not have needed to be informed"

      With a hard Brexit maybe, but the deal proposed the UK would have been under EU law for at least another 18 months.

      Perhaps this is what is meant in Whitehall by "planning for a hard brexit". If it's solved by a hard Brexit, put it in the pile (bury in peat, toilet, leopard etc) and don't bother to work on it.

      1. herman Silver badge

        Re: Government mistake for not brexiting in March

        Instead of a hard brexit, the UK will get a flacid brexit, especially if the pr0n streaming is stopped.

  21. Gordon861

    Time

    Even if this wasn't going to be 'delayed', how the hell did they hope to have this up and running by mid-July?

  22. thosrtanner

    Lets hope they have too much else on their plates in 6 months to return to this poorly thought out piece of regulation

  23. John G Imrie
    WTF?

    We didn't send notification ...

    So it's going to take at least 6 months to fix.

    WTF can't we just send an email and get on with it.

    PS. I think the whole idea is a load of bollocks, but this excuse takes the biscuit.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: We didn't send notification ...

      Sounds like somewhere I used to work where they were going to terminate my contract and forgot to give me the advance termination notification. They had to extend my contract another three months just so they could give me notification in line with their regulations.

      In practical terms it was just a technicality as I was already on loan to the company I was moving out to (a spin-out of where I was working) so it didn't make much difference then, but annoyingly when the new company closed down a few years later and everyone was made redundant the delay in officially starting to work for them tipped me over to the next year and I ended up with a year's less redundancy pay than if I'd moved when I was supposed to.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: We didn't send notification ...

      "So it's going to take at least 6 months to fix."

      I suspect what we see is the "fix".

      The EU is being used as a convenient scapegoat for preventing what the government realised would be a disaster. This was deliberate and will disappear with May.

      Aside from a Tory manifesto pledge (we tried but bad EU etc etc), I can't find who was pushing it in the first place. There's usually some pressure group involved but all of the supporters that were rolled out seem to be new to the party...

      1. Tom Chiverton 1

        Re: We didn't send notification ...

        Mum's fucking Net

  24. tiggity Silver badge

    Bollocks

    No need.

    The mobile providers I have used have always had offensive content blocks on by default (and this always seems to be pr0n as opposed to something I would find offensive like actual torture, animal cruelty etc)

    Most ISPs for "home use" seem to be going the same way, in that various content is blocked by default.

    Don't see why govt can't just leave it to the punters to decide if they want content blocked or not.

    And if adult decides not filters on home internet, then their fault of kids find iffy content.

    .. and it's all a farce as there will always be pr0n out there on sites they will not ban as would be too much outcry - e.g. Twitter so all teh filters are a waste of time, just put a minor block in the road - if someone wants to find pr0n, they will,

    1. grahams_xwing

      Re: Bollocks

      Sky even default to a watershed type time window for smut to get through to the user. So if the precious ones are in bed (without their tech preferably) then it's c(h)ocks away.

  25. Roopee
    Gimp

    Phew!

    There was me, just about to sign up to AirVPN - now I can save at least 6 months' subscription, assuming the very ill-thought-out and almost completely useless censorship ever starts at all...

  26. JoMe

    Well, at least

    you can still see a guy's head getting blown off, or a live body dissected, or hell someone's mouth stitched to someone else's anus. Heaven forbid we show underage kids a nipple or - gasp - the genitals we all descended from on birth. No, far better to hide tiddy and let the innocent dears keep watching people getting murdered and tortured, that's going to lead to normal behavior when they become adults...

  27. Potemkine! Silver badge

    Let's forbid instead of educating! It's easier and more lucrative.

    Bunch of hypocrites.

  28. JoeySter

    This ultimately shuts down half the internet in the UK. Any service that takes user content without pre-moderation has to block the UK or implement verification. This is of course deliberate. The UK government wants to be able to censor the internet and they can't prosecute people for blasphemy if they don't know who or where they are (for example the USA isn't going to extradite people to the UK for 1st amendment violations).

    The only work around for this that I can see is to create an anonymous identification system or rather age verification, though I suspect all attempts will be made to block anyone from doing that. That would consist of a service you can verify with hosted on an Island nation somewhere which doesn't keep your data but that gives you back credentials and allows other services to verify given credentials against it, which can be generated for each site or which send you over to a login on the verification site then back.

    1. Paul Johnson 1
      Thumb Down

      Wrong

      No. Stupid as it is, it isn't that bad. Sites that show less than 33% porn are exempt. Not only is pre-moderation not required, but sites like Reddit (where NSFW material is permitted) do not need to implement the age block.

      Of course this makes a nonsense of the claim that the ban is to stop children coming across porn *by accident*, but hey ho.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wrong

        "but sites like Reddit (where NSFW material is permitted) "

        Tumblr lost a lot of users when they closed down anyone with apparently anything that contained sex or nudity. Various other sites welcomed the disgruntled communities of users with open arms. Definitely Twitter did - so an acquaintance informs me

  29. small and stupid

    If you voted Leave, and enjoy masturbation, you have made a serious error of judgement.

    #Wankers4Revoke

    (for the hard of thinking: Brexit is a disaster, and having our idiot political class constrained by Eurocrats was a fcuking great idea)

  30. Paul Johnson 1
    Big Brother

    Just keep postponing it

    Anyone who knows anything at all about the Internet knows that this will make exactly no difference. It won't stop teenagers because VPNs, and the exclusion of sites like Reddit means it won't stop younger children coming across porn by accident.

    The government knows this, and they also know that three months after it goes live we will have a Panorama programme about how ineffective it all is, followed by opposition calls for the Home Secretary to resign. The only way to avoid this happening is to never get around to implementation.

    In 6 months there will be some other excuse found.

  31. Simon Harris Silver badge
    Coffee/keyboard

    If I rub one out to Loose Women...

    will ITV have to be age verified?

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: If I rub one out to Loose Women...

      Today in Parliament was never the same after Ann Widdecombe retired

      1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: If I rub one out to Loose Women...

        Actually, in pursuance of being "transparent"/"we have nothing to hide", may be our political mistresses and masters will consider attending the debating chamber in the altogether.

        Viewing figures for Today in Parliament amongst other things may go up, or down.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: If I rub one out to Loose Women...

      In court a Sears catalogue could be held to be pr0n if a reader might use it for that purpose.

    3. The Nazz Silver badge

      Re: If I rub one out to Loose Women...

      Maybe not, you're more likely to be certified.

  32. N2 Silver badge

    Over fifty and still nifty

    That was my 50th birthday present and quite a few fit ones too, a few years back now

    Thankfully, my son advised me that its GILFs not MILFs that I need to search for now...

  33. MonkeyCee Silver badge

    Banning porn

    I hope the UK government has been paying attention to Hong Kong.

    If the porn sites get on board with a protest movement, then the people hit the streets.

    I suspect that if the porn sites did a UK boycott for a week, then we'd have a new government,

  34. mazzy2u2

    A chilling image popped into my mind... deep fake May & Javid..... ewwwwwwwwww..... age verify me now!!

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Mission creep

    This isn't about blocking pr0n from kids, who all know what hotspot shield is btw. This is about finding reasons for force "VPN registration" on users further down the road, enforced via the ISPs who will be forced to comply. You can have secrecy from everyone except big-brother/hmg.

    Anonymous because....oh who am I kidding.

  36. earl grey Silver badge
    Facepalm

    This whole mess reminds me of...

    Benny Hill running around in circles with a whole line of folks after him and that funky music cranking one out.

  37. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If there's a will(y), there's a way

    Kids will always find a way around a ban.

    Bans just make the target more exciting.

    1. Tom Chiverton 1

      Re: If there's a will(y), there's a way

      Itym the Internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it

  38. Moog42

    Comedy gold, this should be framed for posterity.

    I don't know what's funnier - politicians and their understanding of technology set against the youthful desire for filth, or the comments in this post.

    Hedge porn and 14k modem line by line smut. Oh the halcyon days.

    1. Simon Harris Silver badge
      IT Angle

      Re: Comedy gold, this should be framed for posterity.

      Hedge porn and 14k modem line by line smut. Oh the halcyon days.

      Obligatory IT Crowd reference:

      “Do you remember the Internet at this speed? Up all night and you only saw eight women.”

  39. Edward Noel

    Please tell your headline writers...

    ...to get a grip

  40. shaunhw
    FAIL

    Same mistake again ? Or are they having us on ?

    I'd be very surprised if they "forgot" to notify the EU, as they "forgot" to do that before, back in 1984 when the "Video Recordings Act" was brought into law. Many people were prosecuted back then for distributing questionable films, most of 'em since "classified" which we can all now watch if we want to! Courtesy HM government and the BBFC. But It seems those prosecutions weren't valid because of this blunder which went on for over 30 years.

    So I really do doubt they would make the same mistake again, having had to quietly recreate the VRA after notifying the EU about it, some 30 odd years too late.

    Anyway here's to another six months of not having to notify the government about possible aspects of ones online activities.

  41. John Savard Silver badge

    Heartening

    Obviously, such a system, in addition to placing people's personal data at great risk, also places a huge burden on ISPs, which would now have to block countless thousands of porn sites not primarily addressing the UK. The government ought not to be requiring ISPs to engage in blocking at all, since that just makes Internet service more expensive, although admittedly some blocking capability is not a bad thing for an ISP to have to block things like botnet control sites. Although the proper fix for that sort of thing is for the operating systems on people's computers to be secure.

  42. Unbleached White Girl

    Oh dear me. I am just wondering what a cockup may do for all these youngsters. Doesn't that kind of thing make one's eyeballs fall out or something?

    And what is the plural of 'cockup' anyway?

    1. herman Silver badge
      Coat

      I think the plural of cockup is pussyfest...

  43. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

    Six more months of RSI then..

    No, no, no, Repetitive Stain Injury, without the "r".

    :)

  44. Simon Harris Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Won't somebody...

    UK government: Won't somebody think of the children

    EU:won't somebody think of the legislation

    Mindgeek: won't somebody think of our profits

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019