Twenty years after the conflict in Darfur first sparked global outrage, children in the region are once again trapped in a catastrophic cycle of violence, hunger, and displacement – but this time, the world is failing to take notice.
Blog
-
World News in Brief: Syria human rights update, Cuba post-hurricane support still vital, impunity and violence in Myanmar
Three mass graves were recently uncovered in northeastern Syria, including one reportedly at the site of a former detention centre run by the Kurdish-backed Syrian Armed Forces (SDF). -
WHO calls for stepped up action to eliminate viral hepatitis
Countries are making measurable progress in combatting viral hepatitis, but the disease remains a major global health challenge, the World Health Organization (WHO) said in a new report published on Tuesday. -
Not Mine
“Chiropractors are my kind of people.” RFK Jr. to Chiropractors Not certain who was more insulted, although it appears both sides considered it a compliment. He went on to say, The people who are drawn to this field are people who do critical thinking, who are willing to question orthodoxies and have the courage to stand up against these orthodoxies. Well, critical […]
The post Not Mine first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.
-
Information Stewardship Forum 2026: Creating Community and Purpose Around US Government Information
As soon as people started walking in the door, I breathed a sigh of relief. After months of careful (some might say obsessive) planning, we were kicking off the inaugural Information Stewardship Forum, 2026. Over three days in March, we opened the doors of the Internet Archive to 120 people who work tirelessly to preserve and give access to government information in the United States. They traveled to San Francisco representing different vital facets of this work: libraries, archives, journalism, research, policy, nonprofits, funding, and technology. Participants also reflected different parts of the government information ecosystem (which includes federal, state and local stakeholders).
The Forum was constructed as a space for participants to share tools, workflows, and lessons learned from digital and physical preservation efforts, and to support practical knowledge exchange across domains and disciplines to ensure that government data remains accessible, trustworthy, and resilient in a rapidly changing information landscape. The preservation of government information has long been carried out by libraries and archives but in the current moment, this work carries a sense of weight and importance.
Internet Archive was a natural host for this event, having long supported preservation and access to government created information and publications: through web archiving efforts including Archive-It; by participating in the the End of Term Crawl; through digitizing government produced publications; and by serving as a depository library in the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). In 2022, Internet Archive’s Democracy’s Library was launched, built on a straightforward but urgent premise: governments have created an abundance of information and put it in the public domain, but the public can’t easily access it.
Of course the Internet Archive is but one of many stakeholders; scaffolding has been established by institutions including the U.S. Government Publishing Office (buttressed by more than 1,000 FDLP depository libraries), the National Archives and Records Administration, and the Library of Congress, alongside countless state and local agencies, archives; and thousands of government information librarians and other specialized data stewards.
Held under Chatham House Rule, the forum created space for candid discussion across plenaries, lightning talks, Birds of a Feather sessions, and closing conversations. It also created ample room for people working on related problems to compare notes, test ideas, and begin seeing the field less as a set of isolated projects and more as a community of collaborators. One theme surfaced again and again: preservation is not a solo endeavor. Preserving public information is not only a technical challenge. It is also an organizational, legal, financial, and civic one. Some high level themes emerged across our three days spent in community.
- Not only is government information being lost, but the the stewardship ecosystem itself remains fragmented and under-described. Mapping this space – who is doing what, and identifying key information assets will be a critical part of this work going forward.
- Recognition that stewardship is more than storage. Saving material is only the beginning. Continuity, trust, and usability are also important components of preservation.
- The emergency response or triage mode that has animated many recent efforts are not sustainable; this work has been indispensable, but fragile. Building on work done on an emergency basis without feeling confined by it is a challenge for moving this work forward.
- Public records laws and access frameworks exist, yet information is still removed, obscured, or made difficult to use over time. Data may remain technically public while being trapped in formats or interfaces that frustrate long-term use. Worse, government information may be inappropriately constricted behind paywalls.
- A related concern was the growing use of web harvesting restrictions in response to concerns about use by AI companies. While understandable in many contexts, those restrictions can also impede public interest archiving and make preservation harder precisely when long term capture is most needed.
- Local government information was identified as especially vulnerable, as were climate data, health data, and disaggregated data that allows communities to see themselves in the record.
- Advocacy matters; the more people who can be drawn in to understand what is at stake and can participate in stewardship, even in modest ways, the more resilient the system becomes. One attendee framed this practical challenge as “How can we have easy to use tools that will allow others to invest in this work?” Tools for participation!
An important concrete outcome from this convening is Preservation of Government Information: A Call to Action. Shared as a draft during the Forum, this text serves as a manifesto of sorts, and gives broader language to themes that surfaced throughout the event: that public access to government information cannot be left to chance, that archive-ready publication should become a norm, and that preserving public information must be treated as a civic obligation. Individuals and organizations are urged to sign and express their support for the document.
So why did I breathe that sigh of relief when we opened the doors at 300 Funston Avenue? I could see the positive body language – recognition, surprise, delight, handshakes, hugs and exclamations that come when people are in community with those they recognize as their people. Across the three days, this emerging community had the opportunity to coalesce, to learn together, and to recognize that they are part of a broader stewardship ecosystem, one that will need stronger coordination, communication, and community. There are still many challenges in this space, but there is a firm resolve to ensure that access to government information remains open and accessible to the public.
The Information Stewardship Forum 2026 was designed to surface the shared problem space, and to facilitate connections, and it was rewarding to see it unfold into a gathering where people were actively identifying concrete collaborations, naming shared principles, discussing infrastructure and standards; fortunately attendees did not need to wonder about how to keep the energy alive after going home; they were able to join and engage in an online community space established by Internet Archive that ensures that the conversation and community can continue.
Graphic recording by Jasmin Pamukcu, Cusp Consulting.
-
Filmmakers Drop Piracy Liability Lawsuit Against ISP RCN
In 2021, a group of independent movie companies, including the makers of The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard, London Has Fallen, and Rambo V, sued RCN Telecom Services at a New Jersey federal court.
The filmmakers alleged that RCN failed to disconnect repeat infringers on its network, making the ISP liable for its subscribers’ copyright infringement.
The lawsuit was one of several filed by the same group of filmmakers against U.S. Internet providers, including Grande Communications, Frontier Communications, and Verizon. These all alleged that the ISPs failed to terminate accounts of repeat infringers, which made the providers secondarily liable for these pirating subscribers.
Stipulation of Dismissal
A few days ago, the RCN case came to an end. In a joint stipulation filed on April 21, the movie companies agreed to dismiss the lawsuit. The dismissal is final, which means that the claims cannot be refiled, while each side covers its own costs and expenses.
“[A]ll parties to this matter […] hereby stipulate that this action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Each party will bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees,” the filing reads.
Stipulation of dismissal 
The legal paperwork does not reference a settlement agreement, nor is a reason mentioned. However, similar to the record label lawsuits against Verizon and Altice that were dropped last week, the Cox Supreme Court decision likely plays a role.
In all these cases, rightsholders argued that the ISPs’ knowledge of the infringing activity, combined with their failure to act, was sufficient to hold them liable for contributory copyright infringement. However, the new Supreme Court ruling narrowed this standard.
In Cox, the Supreme Court stated that contributory liability requires proof that the provider intended its service to be used for infringement. That intent can only be shown in one of two ways. Either the provider actively induced infringement, or the service is one that is tailored to piracy without substantial non-infringing uses.
Reddit Comments and Site Blocking
The RCN case was a substantial one. The filmmakers secured an early win in 2022 when Judge Georgette Castner denied RCN’s motion to dismiss, allowing the contributory and vicarious infringement claims to proceed. The case later expanded through amended complaints and a parallel lawsuit filed by Screen Media Ventures, which was dismissed in 2024.
To gather further evidence, the filmmakers also requested discovery subpoenas against Reddit at the Northern District of California, to unmask users who had posted piracy-related comments. Those efforts largely failed, with Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler ruling that the Redditors’ First Amendment right to anonymous speech outweighed the filmmakers’ interest in the data.
In addition, the case was notable because the filmmakers sought a site-blocking injunction that would have required RCN to block access to The Pirate Bay, 1337x, YTS, RARBG, and other foreign pirate sites. That request was denied as a standalone cause of action, but it remained available as a potential remedy if the filmmakers won the case.
Further Cox Fallout
With this legal battle being dropped, these site-blocking requests will not be considered. However, the Cox ruling has increased the broader call of rightsholder representatives to implement site-blocking legislation in the United States.
There are currently several site-blocking bills in the works, and it is expected that U.S. Congress will seriously consider passing site-blocking legislation before the end of the current term.
Meanwhile, the Cox ruling continues to ripple through U.S. court dockets, with companies including Google and X Corp also arguing the ruling should benefit their pending cases.
—
A copy of the stipulation of dismissal with prejudice, filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, is available here (pdf). The dismissal was signed by Judge Edward S. Kiel late last week.
From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.
-
Pluralistic: Vicky Osterweil’s “The Extended Universe” (28 Apr 2026)
Today’s links
- Vicky Osterweil’s “The Extended Universe”: How Disney killed the movies and took over the world.
- Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
- Object permanence: Zappa v censorship; Chemistry set with no chemicals; Short cons; Mitsubishi’s Dieselgate; “Bellwether.”
- Upcoming appearances: Berlin, NYC, Barcelona, Hay-on-Wye, London, NYC.
- Recent appearances: Where I’ve been.
- Latest books: You keep readin’ em, I’ll keep writin’ ’em.
- Upcoming books: Like I said, I’ll keep writin’ ’em.
- Colophon: All the rest.
Vicky Osterweil’s “The Extended Universe” (permalink)
Vicky Osterweil’s The Extended Universe: How Disney Killed the Movies and Took Over the World makes the kind of long, polemical, startling and illuminating argument that defines great cultural criticism; it’s the sort of book that encapsulates the reasons I read criticism in the first place:
https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/2525-the-extended-universe
My first brush with this kind of criticism came more than two decades ago, when I read John Kessel’s now-classic “Creating the Innocent Killer,” a critique of Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game, a book I had read and enjoyed enough to re-read several times:
https://johnjosephkessel.wixsite.com/kessel-website/creating-the-innocent-killer
Kessel’s argument is that Card used Ender’s Game to smuggle in some very ugly ideas, wrapped in a story that was compelling, even exhilarating. In Ender’s Game, we meet Andrew “Ender” Wiggin, a small, physically weak boy possessed of a prodigious intellect and a great deal of sensitivity and empathy. Ender is tormented by an escalating series of aggressors, whom he retaliates against with overwhelming force, first to the point of lethality and then all the way to literal genocide. And here’s where Card makes his move: Ender’s sensitivity and empathy and intellect tell him that he must respond this way, because he can tell that his aggressors will not back off from their intention to harm him; and because Ender is so small and weak, he has to use whatever tactic his brilliant mind can devise, and if that tactic results in the death penalty for mere bullying, well, that’s the bully’s fault, not Ender’s. Indeed, in dying at Ender’s hands, these bullies re-victimize Ender, because Ender is a gentle, smart, wise, weak person, and these inescapable murders that he is goaded into committing are a stain on his soul that he can never wash away.
Before reading “Creating the Innocent Killer,” I confess I didn’t really understand what criticism was for. Like many people, I conflated “criticism” with “reviews,” thinking of critical works as a species of inconveniently difficult-to-digest essays that might help me figure out which books to read and which movies to see.
Kessel’s magnificent essay changed all that, and not in spite of the fact that Kessel had pointed out some very important problems with a book that I loved, but because of that fact. In helping me understand the ugliness hidden within something whose beauty and virtues I saw very clearly, Kessel taught me more about myself – about where my aesthetics and my values overlapped, and where they diverged. It was literally life-changing.
Like Kessel, Osterweil’s ‘Extended Universe’ deals with media that I have a great deal of affection for – the products of the Walt Disney Company. Though I’m primarily interested in theme parks – I love a big, ambitious built environment of any description and Disney pursues these with a seriousness that few others can touch – the Disney films (and the films of the studios Disney purchased, like Marvel and Lucasfilm) are obviously intimately bound up in those theme park designs.
Osterweil has her own ambivalent affection for these movies. Like so many of us, she’s been raised on them, and they’ve shaped how she sees the world and its stories. But – like me – Osterweil is deeply suspicious of capitalism, American imperialism, and the notion of “intellectual property,” and she uses reviews of a dozen Disney films to make the case that Walt Disney and the studio he founded with his brother are standards-bearers for these odious forces, and not just in the overt ways that might immediately spring to mind, but also in subtle ways that can be teased out of a close reading of the films.
In so doing, Osterweil also makes a sharp and well-argued case that intellectual property, colonialism and racial oppression are all facets of the same drive, the drive of people who fancy themselves born to rule to dominate others, which requires that those others also be dehumanized and their work denigrated. When Walt Disney insisted that his be the only name associated with “his” movies, he was playing out the same logic that underpinned his virulent opposition to labor unions and his participation in American imperialism in Latin America.
As with Kessel, Osterweil’s argument is full of surprises and illuminations that are especially vivid for those of us who have great affection for these works. As her chapter on Black Panther shows, this contradiction need not go unresolved. There is plenty of scope for fans to seize the reins of the narrative (and as her chapter on the reactionary backlash to the later Star Wars movies shows, it’s not just the forces of progress and anti-racism who can pull off this move).
Like the very best criticism, Osterweil’s book is more than a way to deepen your understanding of the material she dissects – it’s a way to deepen your understanding of the world that produced it, and to deepen your understanding of yourself.
Hey look at this (permalink)
- BRIEF OF PENN & TELLER AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-6774/400679/20260312113948009_25-6774%20Penn%20and%20Teller%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf
-
Zack Polanski calls for Trump to be ‘kicked out’ of his Scottish golf courses https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8954xe8yjpo
-
Uncovering Global Telecom Exploitation by Covert Surveillance Actors https://citizenlab.ca/research/uncovering-global-telecom-exploitation-by-covert-surveillance-actors/
-
What’s Missing in the ‘Agentic’ Story https://www.mnot.net/blog/2026/04/24/agents_as_collective_bargains
-
Licensed to Loot https://static1.squarespace.com/static/65c9daef199ea70aa66592fe/t/69e7b2f2949631007bb3d969/1776792306864/Licenced+to+loot+AI+Data+Centre+Report.pdf
Object permanence (permalink)
#20yrsago Frank Zappa’s anti-censorship letter https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudshark/117551768/in/set-72057594090059726/
#15yrsago Chemistry kit with no chemicals https://web.archive.org/web/20110427212354/http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2011/04/chemistry-set-boasts-no-chemicals.html
#15yrsago Russian corruption: crooked officials steal multi-billion-dollar company, $230M tax refund, then murder campaigning lawyer https://web.archive.org/web/20110426045152/http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/20/russia_s_crime_of_the_century?
#15yrsago Golden-age short-change cons https://web.archive.org/web/20110429014539/https://blog.modernmechanix.com/2011/04/26/tricks-of-short-change-artists/
#10yrsago Campaigners search Londoners’ phones to help them understand the Snoopers Charter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szN7DlmMLYg
#10yrsago Mitsubishi’s dieselgate: cheating since 1991 https://web.archive.org/web/20160427145038/https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/mitsubishi-cheated-fuel-economy-tests-since-1991/#ftag=CAD590a51e
#10yrsago Bellwether: Connie Willis’s classic, hilarious novel about the science of trendiness https://memex.craphound.com/2016/04/26/bellwether-connie-williss-classic-hilarious-novel-about-the-science-of-trendiness/
#5yrsago The Big U https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/26/moolah-boolah/#poison-ivies
Upcoming appearances (permalink)
- NYC: Enshittification at Commonweal Ventures, Apr 29
https://luma.com/ssgfvqz8 -
NYC: Techidemic with Sarah Jeong, Tochi Onyebuchi and Alia Dastagir (PEN World Voices), Apr 30
https://worldvoices.pen.org/event/techidemic/ -
Barcelona: Internet no tiene que ser un vertedero (Global Digital Rights Forum), May 13
https://encuentroderechosdigitales.com/en/ -
Berlin: Re:publica, May 18-20
https://re-publica.com/de/news/rp26-sprecher-cory-doctorow -
Berlin: Enshittification at Otherland Books, May 19
https://www.otherland-berlin.de/de/event-details/cory-doctorow.html -
Hay-on-Wye: HowTheLightGetsIn, May 22-25
https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/hay/big-ideas-2 -
SXSW London, Jun 2
https://www.sxswlondon.com/session/how-big-tech-broke-the-internet-b3c4a901 -
NYC: The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to Life After AI with Jonathan Coulton (The Strand), Jun 24
https://www.strandbooks.com/cory-doctorow-the-reverse-centaur-s-guide-to-life-after-ai.html
Recent appearances (permalink)
- Artificial Intelligence: The Ultimate Disruptor, with Astra Taylor and Yoshua Bengio (CBC Ideas)
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-23-ideas/clip/16210039-artificial-intelligence-the-ultimate-disruptor -
When Do Platforms Stop Innovating and Start Extracting? (InnovEU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cccDR0YaMt8 -
Pete “Mayor” Buttigieg (No Gods No Mayors)
https://www.patreon.com/posts/pete-mayor-with-155614612 -
The internet is getting worse (CBC The National)
https://youtu.be/dCVUCdg3Uqc?si=FMcA0EI_Mi13Lw-P -
Do you feel screwed over by big tech? (Ontario Today)
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-45-ontario-today/clip/16203024-do-feel-screwed-big-tech
Latest books (permalink)
- “Canny Valley”: A limited edition collection of the collages I create for Pluralistic, self-published, September 2025 https://pluralistic.net/2025/09/04/illustrious/#chairman-bruce
-
“Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It,” Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/ -
“Picks and Shovels”: a sequel to “Red Team Blues,” about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2025 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250865908/picksandshovels).
-
“The Bezzle”: a sequel to “Red Team Blues,” about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (thebezzle.org).
-
“The Lost Cause:” a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org).
-
“The Internet Con”: A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).
-
“Red Team Blues”: “A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before.” Tor Books http://redteamblues.com.
-
“Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin”, on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com
Upcoming books (permalink)
- “The Reverse-Centaur’s Guide to AI,” a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
-
“Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It” (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026
-
“The Post-American Internet,” a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027
-
“Unauthorized Bread”: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027
-
“The Memex Method,” Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027
Colophon (permalink)
Today’s top sources:
Currently writing: “The Post-American Internet,” a sequel to “Enshittification,” about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.
- “The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to AI,” a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
-
“The Post-American Internet,” a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.
-
A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING
This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.
How to get Pluralistic:
Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):
Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):
https://pluralistic.net/plura-list
Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):
Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):
https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net
Medium (no ads, paywalled):
Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):
https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic
“When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla” -Joey “Accordion Guy” DeVilla
READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies (“BOGUS AGREEMENTS”) that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.
ISSN: 3066-764X
-
The GUARD Act Isn’t Targeting Dangerous AI—It’s Blocking Everyday Internet Use
Lawmakers in Congress are moving quickly on the GUARD Act, an age-gating bill restricting minors’ access to a wide range of online tools, with a key vote expected this week. The proposal is framed as a response to alarming cases involving “AI companions” and vulnerable young users. But the text of the bill goes much further, and could require age gates even for search engines that use AI.
Tell Congress: oppose the guard act
If enacted, the GUARD Act won’t just target a narrow category of risky chatbots. It would require companies to verify the age of every user — then block anyone under 18 from interacting with a huge range of online systems. It would block minors from everyday online tools, undermine parental guidance, and force adults to sacrifice their privacy. In the process, it would require services to implement speech-restricting and privacy-invasive age-verification systems for everyone—not just kids.
Under the GUARD Act’s broad definitions, a high school student could be barred from asking homework help tools questions about algebra problems. A teenager trying to return a product could be kicked out of a standard customer-service chat.
The concerns behind this bill are serious. There have been troubling reports of AI systems engaging in harmful interactions with young users, including cases involving self-harm. Those risks deserve attention. But they call for targeted solutions, like better safeguards and enforcement against bad actors, not sweeping restrictions. The bill’s sponsors say they’re targeting worst-case scenarios — but the bill regulates everyday use.
The GUARD Act’s Broad Definitions Reach Everyday Tools
The problem starts with how the bill defines an “AI chatbot.” It covers any system that generates responses that aren’t fully pre-written by the developer or operator. Such a broad definition sweeps in the basic functionality of all AI-powered tools.
Then there’s the definition of an “AI companion,” which minors are banned from using entirely. An AI companion is any chatbot that produces human-like responses and is designed to “encourage or facilitate” interpersonal or emotional interaction. That may sound aimed at simulated “friends” or therapy chatbots. But in practice, it’s much fuzzier.
Modern chatbots are designed to be conversational and helpful. A homework helper might say “good question” before walking a student through a problem. A customer service chatbot may respond empathetically to a complaint (“I’m sorry you’re having this problem.”) A general-purpose assistant might ask follow-up questions. All of these could be seen as facilitating “interpersonal” interaction — and triggering the GUARD Act.
Faced with steep penalties and unclear boundaries, companies are unlikely to take chances on letting young people use their online tools. They’ll block minors entirely or strip their tools down to something less useful for everyone. The result isn’t a narrow safeguard—it’s a broad restriction on everyday online interactions.
Homework Question? Show ID And Call Your Parents
Start with a student getting help with homework. Under the GUARD Act, the service must verify the user’s age using more than a simple checkbox—it must rely on a “reasonable age verification” measure, which could require a government ID or a third-party age-checking system. If the system decides a user is under 18, the company must decide if its tool qualifies as an “AI Companion.” If there’s any risk it does, the safest move is to block access entirely.
The same logic applies to everyday customer service. A teenager trying to fix an order issue gets routed to a chatbot, and the company faces a choice: build a full age-verification system for a routine interaction, or restrict access to avoid liability. Many will choose the latter.
This isn’t a narrow restriction aimed at a few risky products. It’s a compliance regime that pushes companies to block or limit any product that generates text for minors, across the board.
ID Checks for Everyone
The GUARD Act doesn’t just affect minors. The bill takes a big step towards an internet that only works when users are willing to upload a valid ID or comply with other invasive age-verification schemes. Companies must verify the age of every user—not through a simple self-declaration, but through a “reasonable age verification” system tied to the individual.
In practice, that means collecting sensitive personal information: government IDs, financial data, or biometric identifiers. Companies can outsource verification, but they remain legally responsible. And the law requires ongoing verification, so this isn’t a one-time check. Worse, studies consistently show that millions of people have outdated information on their IDs, such as an old address, or do not have government ID. Should services require ID, many folks without current or any ID will be shut out.
And for those who do have compliant ID, turning over this information repeatedly creates obvious risks. Databases of sensitive identity information become targets for breaches. Anonymous or pseudonymous use of online tools becomes harder or impossible.
To keep minors away from certain chatbots, the GUARD Act would require everyone to prove who they are just to use basic online tools. That’s a steep tradeoff. And it doesn’t actually address the specific harms the bill is supposed to solve.
Vague Definitions, Huge Penalties
The GUARD Act’s broad scope is enforced with steep penalties. Companies can face fines of up to $100,000 per violation, enforced by federal and state officials. At the same time, key terms like “AI companion” rely on vague concepts such as “emotional interaction.” That combination will lead to overblocking. Faced with legal uncertainty and serious liability, companies won’t parse small distinctions. They’ll restrict access, limit features, or block minors entirely.
That is the unfortunate result of the GUARD Act, even though the concerns animating it are worthy of fixing. But the GUARD Act’s broad terms will apply far beyond the concerning scenarios.
In the end, that means a more restricted and more surveilled internet. Teenagers would lose access to tools they rely on for school and everyday tasks. Everyone else faces new barriers, including ID checks. Smaller developers, who aren’t able to absorb compliance costs and legal risk, would be pushed out, leaving the largest companies even more dominant.
Young people — and all people — deserve protection from genuinely harmful products. But this bill doesn’t do that. It trades away privacy, access, and useful technology in exchange for a blunt system that misses the mark.
Congress could act soon. Tell them to reject the GUARD Act.
Tell Congress: say no to mandatory online id checks
-
Congress Must Reject New Insufficient 702 Reauthorization Bill
Speaker Johnson has introduced a new fig leaf over the American surveillance state, the Foreign Intelligence Accountability Act. Introduced with only days to go before Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) expires and the U.S. government loses one of its most invasive surveillance programs, the bill does nothing to make any of the substantial changes privacy advocates have been asking for — most notably, it fails to give us a real warrant requirement for the FBI to snoop through the private conversations of people on U.S. soil.
Section 702 needs to be reauthorized by Congress every few years. These reauthorizations give us a chance to tinker with the language of the law and introduce some much-needed reforms. This attempt at reauthorization has been particularly fraught, but there is still time for Congress to include real protection for Americans’ civil liberties and rights. We need to make sure that when an FBI agent wants to look through Americans’ conversations scooped up as part of a national security intelligence program, they need a warrant signed by a judge just as if they were trying to search your email account or your house.
This new bill mandates that a civil liberties protection officer at the Director of National Intelligence review all queries of U.S. persons made by the FBI under this program to make sure no laws have been broken. It’s bad enough to let the intelligence community police itself, and what’s more, the assessment for illegality would be made after a U.S. person has already been spied on. This is hardly the reform we need and will likely just lead to continued abuse with no real accountability or consequences.
The bill “prohibits targeting United States persons,” but so does current law. This “change” does absolutely nothing to address what’s really happening—which is that surveillance of people in the United States is usually justified as “incidental” because Americans aren’t the “target” of the surveillance. The bill does not create a warrant requirement, it does not create any new transparency requirements, and it does not protect Americans’ privacy.
We urge Congress, and we urge you to write to your Congresspeople, to tell them this: Reject the surveillance state’s latest smokescreen known as the Foreign Intelligence Accountability Act and keep pushing for real reforms.
