The UK Online Safety Act: Potentially Strengthening Online Privacy and Online Safety in the Digital Age

The United Kingdom

Introduction

The Internet is a powerful capability that facilitates communication, commerce, and

access to information. However, its benefits are accompanied by significant risks,

including cyberbullying, harmful content exposure, and online exploitation. The UK Online

Safety Act seeks to mitigate these dangers by imposing stringent requirements on digital

platforms. This article explores the Act’s implications, enforcement mechanisms,

challenges, and its broader impact on companies and users.

Purpose and Key Obligations

The UK Online Safety Act is a regulatory framework aimed at protecting users from harmful and illegal content online, particularly children. It imposes obligations on online platforms, search engines, and service providers to ensure safety while balancing freedom of expression and privacy. Key obligations under the Act include:

• Mandatory content moderation – Platforms must take initiative-taking measures to identify and remove harmful or illegal content.

• Age verification requirements – Websites providing adult content must implement robust age-verification mechanisms to prevent access by minors.

• Transparency obligations – Digital service providers must disclose their content moderation policies and publish reports on enforcement actions.

• Legal accountability – Senior executives of non-compliant companies may face personal liability and potential criminal prosecution.

• Protection against online fraud – Platforms must prevent scams and fraudulent activities to safeguard users.

Companies providing user-generated content and social networking services must align their policies with the Act’s requirements to ensure compliance.

Key Definitions and Terms

To fully understand the UK Online Safety Act, it is essential to define its key terms:

• Age Assurance/Age Verification: Measures used by platforms to verify users’ ages to prevent children from accessing harmful content (e.g., ID checks, AI-based age estimation).

• Algorithmic Content Moderation: The use of artificial intelligence and automated systems to detect, filter, and remove harmful or illegal content.

• Children’s Risk Assessment: A mandatory assessment for platforms likely to be accessed by children, identifying risks related to exposure to harmful content (e.g., cyberbullying, self-harm, eating disorders).

• Content Takedown Requests: Formal government or regulatory requests to remove harmful or illegal content from digital platforms.

• Duty of care: A legal requirement for companies to take reasonable measures to protect users from harmful digital content.

• End-to-end encryption: A privacy-enhancing feature that secures communications from third-party access but poses challenges for monitoring harmful content.

• Freedom of Expression Duty: A legal obligation for platforms to balance content moderation with users’ rights to express opinions online.

• Harmful but Legal Content (Category 1 only): Content that, while not illegal, poses a risk to users, such as:

o    Misinformation/disinformation

o    Content promoting self-harm

o    Online abuse and harassment

• Harmful Content: Any material likely to cause significant physical, emotional, or psychological harm, including cyberbullying and misinformation.

• Illegal Content: Content that violates UK law, including:

o    Child sexual abuse material (CSAM)

o    Terrorist content

o    Hate speech

o    Fraudulent or scam content

• Online Harms: A broad term referring to risks such as cyberbullying, hate speech, misinformation, and exploitation that the Act aims to mitigate.

• Proactive Compliance Measures: Strategies that platforms must implement to prevent harmful content before it appears, rather than just reacting to violations.

• Regulated Services: Digital platforms that enable user-generated content, including social media, messaging apps, and search engines.

• Search Service: Any search engine that enables users to retrieve publicly available content across the internet.

• Senior Manager Liability: Named individuals within companies may be held personally accountable for regulatory breaches, with potential fines or criminal penalties.

• Transparency Reporting: A requirement for digital service providers to publish reports detailing their moderation efforts, policy enforcement, and risk assessments.

• User-Generated Content: Any form of content, such as videos, posts, comments, or reviews, created and shared by users rather than platform owners.

• User-to-User Service: Any platform, app, or website that allows users to upload, share, or interact with content (e.g., social media, messaging apps, gaming platforms).

  
  

Online Service Categories (Defined by Ofcom)

The Act classifies regulated services into three main categories, based on risk level and user reach:

• Category 1 Services:

o    Large social media platforms and services with high reach and functionality (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X).

o    Category 1 Services-classified platforms must provide user-controlled content filtering and demonstrate risk mitigation strategies for such content.

o    Additional duties on transparency, user empowerment, and freedom of expression.

• Category 2A Services:

o    Search engines that index and display content from across the web (e.g., Google, Bing).

o    Must take steps to prevent access to illegal content and reduce risks for children.

• Category 2B Services:

o    Smaller social media platforms, forums, and user-to-user services that do not meet Category 1 thresholds.

o    Have fewer obligations but must still address illegal and harmful content.

Challenges for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises & Startups in Compliance

While large tech firms have the resources to comply with the Online Safety Act, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and startups face significant compliance challenges. These include:

• High Financial Costs: Smaller platforms may struggle with the cost of hiring compliance officers, investing in AI moderation tools, and conducting risk assessments.

• Legal & Administrative Burdens: Unlike larger corporations with dedicated legal teams, SMEs may lack the expertise to interpret complex regulatory requirements.

• Potential Barriers to Market Entry: New digital startups could be discouraged from entering the UK market due to strict regulatory overhead, which may stifle innovation and limit competition.

• Note: To support SMEs, policymakers could consider compliance exemptions or phased implementation strategies to allow smaller companies to adjust without compromising online privacy and online safety.

User Empowerment & Digital Rights

One of the key aspects of the UK Online Safety Act is its focus on user empowerment and digital rights. The Act includes several provisions aimed at ensuring users have greater control over their online experiences, including:

• Content Filtering Controls: Platforms, especially Category 1 services, must provide tools that allow users to filter out harmful but legal content based on their preferences.

• Transparency in Moderation Policies: Companies are required to clearly explain their content moderation processes, enabling users to understand what types of content are restricted and why.

• Appeals & Complaint Mechanisms: If users believe their content was wrongly removed, they have the right to challenge takedown decisions through a structured appeal process.

• Parental & Child Safety Controls: Stronger parental control features and default safety settings for child accounts aim to minimize children’s exposure to harmful content.

While these measures enhance user rights, concerns remain about the effectiveness

and fairness of appeals processes and whether platforms will over-censor content out

of caution.

Potential Advantages

The UK Online Safety Act provides several advantages that promote a safer digital environment:

• Enhanced User Protection – The Act significantly reduces exposure to harmful content, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children and individuals prone to online exploitation. By requiring platforms to implement content moderation measures and robust age verification systems, users are less likely to encounter harmful or distressing materials.

• Greater Accountability for Tech Companies – Platforms can no longer ignore harmful content. The Act imposes strict obligations requiring social media companies, messaging platforms, and other digital service providers to take responsibility for the material shared on their platforms. This shift ensures that corporations prioritize user safety over engagement metrics.

• Increased Transparency and Public Trust – Mandatory reporting and compliance disclosures mean that tech companies must be open about their moderation policies, enforcement actions, and internal safety measures. This transparency fosters greater public trust and provides regulators with essential oversight tools to ensure compliance.

• Protection Against Online Scams and Fraud – Digital fraud and deceptive practices have become increasingly common, affecting millions of users worldwide. The Act enforces stricter regulations on platforms, requiring them to detect and remove fraudulent content swiftly. This measure particularly benefits companies and consumers who are often victims of social engineering scams and financial fraud.

• Empowerment of Users Through Safer Online Spaces – By reducing the prevalence of cyberbullying, hate speech, and harmful digital interactions, users can engage more confidently in online communities. The Act encourages social media companies and online platforms to establish safer environments where individuals feel protected from harassment and abuse.

• Encouragement of Industry-Wide Best Practices – The Act sets a benchmark for global online safety, influencing international regulatory frameworks. Companies operating in multiple jurisdictions may adopt similar safety measures beyond the UK to maintain consistency across markets. As a result, digital safety efforts are strengthened worldwide.

• Note: These key benefits illustrate the Act’s transformative role in making online platforms safer, more transparent, and more accountable. While enforcement remains a challenge, the long-term impact is expected to foster a more responsible and user-centric digital landscape.

  
  

Potential Disadvantages

The UK Online Safety Act aims to regulate digital platforms, protect users—especially children—from harmful content, and hold tech companies accountable. However, implementing and enforcing the Act comes with several disadvantages:

• Impact on Free Speech and Censorship:

o    The Act requires platforms to proactively remove "legal but harmful" content, leading to concerns about over-censorship.

o    Platforms may resort to automated moderation, which can misinterpret context and unfairly remove legitimate content.

o    Fear of penalties may result in self-censorship, where users and platforms overcompensate by restricting speech beyond what is required.

• Technical Challenges in Content Moderation:

o    Scalability Issues: Platforms must monitor vast amounts of user-generated content, making enforcement technically demanding.

o    AI Limitations: Automated moderation tools are prone to false positives and negatives, failing to distinguish between harmful content and legitimate discussions.

• End-to-End Encryption Conflict: The Act could pressure platforms to weaken encryption to monitor content, raising security and privacy concerns.

• Increased Compliance Costs:

o    Companies must allocate significant financial and human resources to implement compliance measures, such as hiring moderators, developing AI filters, and conducting risk assessments.

o    Smaller platforms may struggle to meet these requirements, potentially stifling competition and innovation.

• Ambiguity and Legal Uncertainty:

o    The definitions of “harmful content” and “duty of care” are vague and subjective, making it difficult for platforms to determine compliance.

o    The Act’s broad scope leaves room for interpretation inconsistencies, leading to potential legal disputes.

• Extraterritorial Enforcement and Jurisdictional Issues:

o    The Act applies to platforms accessible in the UK, even if they are based elsewhere.

o    This could create conflicts with international laws, particularly with jurisdictions that prioritize free speech, such as the US First Amendment protections.

o    Global companies might have to create region-specific policies or geo-block content for UK users.

• Potential for Government Overreach:

o    Critics argue that the Act gives the UK government excessive control over online content.

o    There are concerns about political misuse, where governments could pressure platforms to silence dissent or unfavorable narratives.

• Chilling Effect on Innovation:

o    Strict regulations may deter startups and new tech companies from operating in the UK due to compliance burdens.

o    Companies may limit features or exit the UK market to avoid legal risks, reducing online services for UK users.

• Enforcement and Resource Constraints:

  • Ofcom, the UK regulator in charge of enforcement, may face operational difficulties in managing compliance across millions of websites.

  • The effectiveness of penalties (e.g., fines, blocking services, criminal liability for executives) depends on the ability to enforce them, particularly against foreign tech giants.

  • Note: While the UK Online Safety Act aims to create a safer digital environment, its enforcement raises legal, technical, economic, and ethical concerns. The ability to balance safety, privacy, and freedom of expression remains a significant challenge, and the Act's long-term impact on the digital landscape is still uncertain.

    
    

Enforcement Authority: Powers, Responsibilities, and Role

The Office of Communications (Ofcom) is the designated regulator for enforcing the UK Online Safety Act. Ofcom’s enforcement responsibilities include:

• Developing compliance guidelines – Ofcom establishes clear expectations for digital platforms regarding the identification and removal of harmful content.

• Conducting investigations – The regulator has the authority to launch investigations into potential violations and assess companies’ adherence to their obligations.

• Issuing penalties and sanctions – Ofcom can impose financial penalties, enforce platform restrictions, and, in extreme cases, pursue criminal proceedings against senior executives.

• Collaborating with law enforcement – Ofcom works with security agencies to combat illegal activities, including child exploitation and terrorist content dissemination.

• Overseeing transparency measures – Platforms must submit regular transparency reports outlining their efforts to mitigate online harm.

  
  

Enforcement Fines and Penalties

To deter non-compliance, the Online Safety Act imposes severe penalties:

• Fines of up to £18 million or 10% of global revenue, whichever is higher.

• Criminal prosecution of senior executives who fail to fulfill safety obligations.

• Service restrictions or complete bans on platforms that repeatedly violate regulations.

• Immediate takedown orders for content deemed harmful or illegal by authorities.

• Note: These penalties underscore the UK government’s commitment to enforcing digital safety standards.

  
  

Loopholes & Unintended Consequences

While the Act aims to improve online safety, critics warn of potential loopholes and unintended negative effects:

• State Overreach & Free Speech Concerns: Critics argue that broad regulatory powers could be used to pressure platforms into removing lawful but controversial speech.

• Over-Removal of Content (“Chilling Effect”): To avoid penalties, platforms may err on the side of excessive moderation, leading to over-censorship of political speech, satire, and legitimate debate.

• Circumvention by Bad Actors: Criminals and extremists may shift to encrypted messaging services or decentralized platforms to evade regulation.

• Note: Regulators must strike a balance between safety and preserving free expression, ensuring that enforcement is targeted and proportional.

  
  

Enforcement Challenges

Despite its merits, the Online Safety Act enforcement creates several enforcement challenges:

• Balancing Online Safety with Free Speech – One of the most contentious aspects of the Act is determining what constitutes harmful but legal content. While the Act aims to remove harmful material, there is a fine line between moderation and censorship. Critics argue that excessive content removal could stifle freedom of expression and create an over-policed digital environment.

• Regulating Encrypted Communications:

  •  Many messaging services, such as WhatsApp and Signal, use end-to-end encryption to protect user privacy. While encryption is essential for security, it also makes it difficult for regulators and law enforcement agencies to monitor and remove harmful content. The Act’s enforcement mechanisms must navigate this conflict between privacy and public safety.

  • WhatsApp and Signal have publicly opposed government backdoors into encrypted messages, with some threatening to withdraw services from the UK if compliance is forced.

  • Apple has taken the unprecedented step of removing its highest-level data security tool from customers in the UK, after the UK government demanded access to user data.

• Ensuring International Compliance – The Internet is a global ecosystem, and many platforms operate beyond the UK’s jurisdiction. The ability to ensure that international platforms comply with UK regulations poses a significant challenge, particularly if those platforms follow different legal and ethical standards in their home countries. Enforcement may require cross-border regulatory agreements and cooperation between governments.

• Resource Allocation for Enforcement – Ofcom and other regulatory bodies require substantial funding, staffing, and technological resources to monitor compliance effectively. Given the vast volume of digital content generated daily, monitoring and enforcing violations on large platforms is an extensive and costly task. Regulators must invest in AI-driven content analysis and automated enforcement tools to scale their efforts.

• Potential for Regulatory Overburden – While large tech firms may have the resources to comply with the Act, smaller businesses and startups may struggle with the associated costs and regulatory requirements. Compliance demands could create barriers to entry for new players in the digital space, potentially stifling innovation and competition.

• Defining and Addressing Emerging Online Harms – As technology evolves, new forms of online harm will emerge, such as deepfake content, AI-generated deepfakes and other misinformation, and advanced cyber threats. The Act must remain adaptable to address future challenges while avoiding unintended consequences, such as penalizing legitimate technological advancements.

• User Resistance and Public Perception – Some users and advocacy groups fear that increased government intervention in online content regulation may lead to surveillance overreach and infringement on digital rights. Public trust in the Act’s implementation depends on transparency, clear guidelines, and safeguards against abuse of power.

  
  

Enforcement Case Studies

Understanding the impact of the UK Online Safety Act requires looking at real-world examples of online safety measures and failures. Below are relevant case studies:

• Facebook & Disinformation Campaigns: Despite efforts to combat misinformation, Facebook has been criticized for allowing harmful political propaganda to spread, influencing elections worldwide. The Act aims to hold platforms accountable for such failures.

• X Content Moderation: Under new leadership, X significantly reduced its content moderation workforce, leading to increased hate speech, misinformation, and regulatory scrutiny.

• UK’s Deepfake Pornography Crackdown: In 2024, UK regulators intensified enforcement against deepfake pornography, requiring platforms to remove AI-generated sexually explicit content of non-consenting individuals.

• Age Verification Enforcement in Adult Content Industry: UK regulators have begun issuing fines and blocking access to adult content websites that fail to implement robust age-verification mechanisms.

  
  

Future Outlook of the UK Online Safety Act:

Looking ahead, the Online Safety Act is expected to undergo further amendments and legal challenges, shaping its long-term effectiveness. Key areas to watch include:

• AI & Automated Moderation Evolution: Advances in AI-driven content moderation will play a key role in reducing harmful content while minimizing wrongful removals.

• Potential Amendments Based on Industry Feedback: Policymakers may revise certain provisions to address concerns from tech companies, privacy advocates, and free speech defenders.

• Global Influence & Regulatory Harmonization: The UK’s approach to online safety could influence other jurisdictions, leading to similar regulations in the EU, US, and other major markets.

• Legal Challenges & Revisions: Free speech groups, tech firms, and advocacy organizations may challenge the provisions of the Act, resulting in court rulings that shape enforcement.

• Note: As the digital landscape evolves, maintaining a balance between safety, innovation, and free expression will remain a core challenge for regulators.

  
  

Conclusion:

The UK Online Safety Act represents a significant shift in digital regulation, aiming to protect users while imposing new responsibilities on online platforms. By enhancing content moderation, transparency, and accountability, the Act seeks to mitigate online harms while empowering users with greater control over their digital experiences.

However, the Act also introduces complex challenges related to free speech, platform compliance, and enforcement feasibility. While large tech firms may adapt quickly, startups and SMEs face major hurdles, and concerns about over-censorship and regulatory overreach persist.

Going forward, collaboration between regulators, industry leaders, civil rights organizations, and users will be key to refining the Act. The future of online safety in the UK depends on continuous dialogue, technological adaptation, and thoughtful policymaking to ensure a safer digital space that also preserves innovation and fundamental freedoms.

Questions Businesses Should Ask When Preparing to Comply with The UK Online Safety Act’s Online Privacy and Online Safety Requirements:

• Scope & Applicability:

o    Does my business operate an online platform, search engine, or user-generated content service accessible in the UK?

o    Is my service classified as Category 1, Category 2A, or Category 2B platforms under the Act?

o    Does my platform allow user interaction, including messaging, commenting, or sharing content?

• Risk Assessments & Safety Duties:

o    Have I conducted a Children’s Risk Assessment to identify and mitigate online harms for under-18 users?

o    Have I conducted a Service Risk Assessment to assess risks of illegal content and harm to adult users?

o    Do I have an effective risk mitigation plan for harmful but legal content (for Category 1 services)?

• Child Safety & Age Verification:

o    Does my platform implement age assurance or age verification measures to prevent children from accessing harmful content?

o    How do I verify the age of users while complying with data protection laws (e.g., UK GDPR. etc.)?

o    Are parental controls or default safety settings enabled for child users?

• Privacy & Data Protection Compliance:

o    How does my service balance user safety with the right to privacy and freedom of expression?

o    Are my data collection, processing, and retention policies aligned with the UK GDPR and the EU Data Protection Act 2018?

o    Do I obtain proper user consent for data processing, including minors?

• Content Moderation & Illegal Content:

o    Does my platform have systems to detect and remove illegal content (e.g., terrorism, child sexual abuse material, hate speech)?

o    Do I have mechanisms to report and act on harmful content efficiently?

o    Are my moderation policies transparent, and do they align with the Act’s safety duties?

• User Empowerment & Reporting Tools:

o    Does my platform provide users with tools to report harmful content easily?

o    Do I offer options for users to control the content they see and manage their online experience?

o    Have I implemented policies to prevent online abuse and protect vulnerable users?

• Transparency & Regulatory Compliance:

o    Do I meet the transparency reporting requirements set by Ofcom?

o    Have I reviewed Ofcom’s latest codes of practice and guidance on compliance?

o    Am I prepared to respond to regulatory investigations and comply with enforcement actions?

• Penalties & Non-Compliance Risks:

o    What are the potential fines and enforcement actions for non-compliance?

o    Have I designated a senior manager or compliance officer responsible for Online Safety Act obligations?

o    Do I have an internal process for monitoring compliance and adapting to regulatory updates?

Sources:

• “Apple Pulls Data Protection Tool After UK Government Security Row” – BBC

• “Categorisation of Services in the Online Safety Act” – Online Safety Act Network

• “Countdown to A Safer Life Online” – Ofcom

• “Decoding the UK Online Safety Act 2023: Latest Draft Guidance, Key Features, and Insights” – Cooley

• “End-to-End Encryption “Backdoor” A Bad Idea” – BBC

• “Guide for Services: Complying with the Online Safety Act” - Ofcom

• “Implementing the Online Safety Act: Additional Duties for ‘Categorised’ Online Services” – Ofcom

• “Kids Online Safety Act Continues to Threaten Our Rights Online: 2024 in Review” – Electronic Frontier Foundation

• “Now Online Safety Act is Law, UK Has ‘Priorities’ – But Still Will Not Explain ‘Spy Clause’” – The Register 

• “Ofcom’s Approach to Implementing the Online Safety Act” – Ofcom

• “Ofcom Calls on Tech Firms to Step Up Action Against ‘Revenge Porn’” – The Guardian

• “Online Safety Act 2023” – UK Government

• “Online Safety Act Compliance is Coming” – TaylorWessing

• “Online Safety: Explainer” – UK Government

• “Online Safety Act: New Criminal Offences Circular” – UK Government

• “Online Safety Act 2023: Time to Prepare as UK’s Ofcom Confirms Start of Illegal Content Duties” – OsborneClark 

• “Potential Impact of the Online Safety Bill” – UK Government

• “Statement: Protecting People from Illegal Harms Online” - Ofcom

• “Tech Giants Told UK Online Safety ‘Not Up for Negotiation” – The Guardian

• “The Implications of the Online Safety Act 2023 on Online Businesses and the UK Tech Sector” – iLaw

• “The Online Safety Act (Category 1, Category 2A and Category 2B Threshold Conditions) Regulations 2025” – UK Government

• “The Online Safety Bill: A Massive Threat to Online Privacy, Security, and Speech” – Electronic Frontier Foundation

• “The UK Online Safety Regime: Five Months On (Insights)” – Mayer|Brown

• “The UK’s Controversial Online Safety Act is Now Law” - Wired

• “Understanding the Implications of the New UK’s Online Safety Act” – Logan & Partners

• “UK’s Digital Overreach Risks Trump’s Wrath” – The Times

• “UK to Name and Shame Social Media Groups in Online Misogyny Crackdown” – Financial Times

• “UK Online Safety Act 2023” – Latham & Watkins

• “What is the Online Safety Act and What Powers Will It Provide?” – The Guardian

 Appendix 1: Frequently Asked Questions

1. What types of content must platforms remove under the UK Online Safety Act?

Response: Platforms must remove illegal content, including:

• CSAM

• Terrorist content

• Hate speech

• Content promoting self-harm or suicide

• Fraudulent or scam content

For Category 1 platforms (major social media and search engines), they must also provide tools for users to filter out harmful but legal content, such as disinformation, online abuse, and content promoting eating disorders.

2. Are private messages affected by the UK Online Safety Act?

Response: Yes, but with limitations. While public posts are heavily regulated, the Act also applies to private messaging services like WhatsApp, Signal, and Facebook Messenger if they are identified as a potential risk for illegal content. This has led to controversy over how encrypted messaging services can comply without violating end-to-end encryption policies.

3. How does the Act impact freedom of speech?

Response: Critics argue that the Act may lead to over-censorship, as platforms might remove controversial content to avoid penalties. However, the Act includes a “Freedom of Expression Duty,” requiring platforms to balance content moderation with the right to free speech. Ofcom’s role is to ensure moderation decisions are not overly restrictive.

4. What are the penalties for non-compliance?

Response: Platforms failing to comply with the Act can face:

• Fines up to £18 million or 10% of global revenue (whichever is higher)

• Criminal liability for senior executives who fail to enforce safety measures

• Platform restrictions or outright bans on services that repeatedly violate the law

  
  

5. What protections does the Act provide for children?

Response: The Act prioritizes child safety by requiring platforms to:

• Implement age verification and assurance mechanisms for adult content

• Default to the highest privacy settings for child accounts

• Conduct Children’s Risk Assessments to prevent exposure to harmful content

• Provide parental control tools for monitoring online activity

  
  

6. How does the Act address misinformation and online scams?

Response: Platforms are required to identify, minimize, and remove fraudulent content, such as:

• Scam advertisements and phishing schemes

• Fake health information (e.g., COVID-19 misinformation)

• Election disinformation

Search engines must also adjust their algorithms to reduce the visibility of known misinformation sources.

7. How can users appeal content moderation decisions?

Response: Platforms must establish clear and transparent appeals processes for:

• Content takedowns

• Account suspensions

• Algorithmic downranking of content

Users must be given a way to challenge removals and request reviews, ensuring fair moderation decisions.

8. Will AI be used for content moderation?

Response: Yes. Many platforms rely on AI-driven content moderation systems to detect harmful content. However, AI bias and false removals remain concerns. The Act encourages a hybrid approach, combining AI detection with human oversight to ensure fairness.

9. How does the Act compare to international regulations?

Response:

• EU Digital Services Act (DSA): Both laws aim to regulate harmful content, but the DSA includes stricter user privacy rules.

• US Section 230: The UK Online Safety Act holds platforms more accountable for user-generated content, whereas US law shields platforms from most liability.

• Australia’s Online Safety Laws: Similar in scope, Australia has already enforced penalties against non-compliant tech firms, setting a precedent for the UK.

10. What is next for the UK Online Safety Act?  

Response:

• Potential amendments based on industry feedback and legal challenges

• Evolving AI moderation technologies to improve enforcement

• Cross-border regulatory agreements with the EU and US to streamline compliance

• Ongoing Ofcom reviews to fine-tune implementation and enforcement.

The Act is expected to influence global regulatory trends, making online safety a higher priority worldwide.