Mobile legislation follows trends and misses important elements
Well, saying this is limited to mobile devices is a bit inaccurate, but this article was triggered by 2 things that have happened lately. Legislation around in app purchases and experiences getting my niece up and running on Windows Phone 8.1.
The in app purchase stuff revolves around EU requests to Apple and Google to make changes to their services, because, while in app purchases could be configured to require a parent to authorize them, the authorization persisted for up to a half hour after allowing kids to ravage their parents accounts raking up huge bills. In my opinion this is a totally relevant topic... but it is the realm of consumer protection and little else. Honestly, if between Apple and Google 95% of market weren't affected by this I'd say the correct course would be to avoid afflicted operating systems.
The other bit revolves around something I'm surprised to only just be experiencing for the first time which is actually much more critical in my opinion and even more totally overlooked than the in-app purchase fiasco. Child protection.
I recently replace my Samsung ATIV S with a Lumia 1020. So, we gave the ATIV S to my niece. I have a developer license and the phone was registered in the dev preview program so it is running Windows Phone 8.1. Apparently, they added some parental controls to the OS as when she fired it up, she couldn't download any apps. In Windows Phone 8.1, if your Microsoft account indicates you're under a certain age, you need a parent to authorize your downloads, set acceptable games rating, and if under 13 even accept the terms of use for you. If you're a parent account and its a new account, you need a credit card to validate your age.
This is the first time I've ever seen a company take reasonable steps towards ensuring that online policies regarding children entering into contracts with companies were actually enforced. Account access is remotely administered by a VERIFIED adult.
I'm stunned that I haven't seen this before. I'm even more stunned no one has yet been sued for not having this sort of thing in place. With cyber bullying on the rise and cyber exploitation pervading more and more online services it is becoming more important than ever to be able to enforce things like the ages of people applying for online accounts and that permission of a parent or guardian has been granted.
Thinking on this one move by Microsoft makes me wonder if the victims of cyber bullying may be able to press charges against sites like Facebook and Twitter if abuse happens to a minor and a parent wasn't aware that their child had an account. It shows that there is more that can be done to prevent unapproved access by minors to their sites. A case could be made that if the parents were aware they may have stopped them from using the site if they weren't mature enough to handle it or might have had some other recourse to help them. By not vetting the application process substantially they easily allow anyone to use/abuse the service and potential be caused harm or case harm to others and they can get there, even under age, without anyone responsible knowing they use the service.
Don't get me wrong, the whole process was a pain in the butt. And it seems like a half baked idea which has only been properly applied to Windows Phone at the moment. But, at the end of the day what made it a hassle is really the entire point. There was no easy way for this minor to get access to a set of services that could expose her to dangerous content without a consenting adult helping her to do so.
The controls I think could be more granular and should be applied more widely and to Windows 8/RT and Xbox and on a per device basis as well as with other services like Outlook and Skype. But I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing these sorts of controls on other platforms as well.
The in app purchase stuff revolves around EU requests to Apple and Google to make changes to their services, because, while in app purchases could be configured to require a parent to authorize them, the authorization persisted for up to a half hour after allowing kids to ravage their parents accounts raking up huge bills. In my opinion this is a totally relevant topic... but it is the realm of consumer protection and little else. Honestly, if between Apple and Google 95% of market weren't affected by this I'd say the correct course would be to avoid afflicted operating systems.
The other bit revolves around something I'm surprised to only just be experiencing for the first time which is actually much more critical in my opinion and even more totally overlooked than the in-app purchase fiasco. Child protection.
I recently replace my Samsung ATIV S with a Lumia 1020. So, we gave the ATIV S to my niece. I have a developer license and the phone was registered in the dev preview program so it is running Windows Phone 8.1. Apparently, they added some parental controls to the OS as when she fired it up, she couldn't download any apps. In Windows Phone 8.1, if your Microsoft account indicates you're under a certain age, you need a parent to authorize your downloads, set acceptable games rating, and if under 13 even accept the terms of use for you. If you're a parent account and its a new account, you need a credit card to validate your age.
This is the first time I've ever seen a company take reasonable steps towards ensuring that online policies regarding children entering into contracts with companies were actually enforced. Account access is remotely administered by a VERIFIED adult.
I'm stunned that I haven't seen this before. I'm even more stunned no one has yet been sued for not having this sort of thing in place. With cyber bullying on the rise and cyber exploitation pervading more and more online services it is becoming more important than ever to be able to enforce things like the ages of people applying for online accounts and that permission of a parent or guardian has been granted.
Thinking on this one move by Microsoft makes me wonder if the victims of cyber bullying may be able to press charges against sites like Facebook and Twitter if abuse happens to a minor and a parent wasn't aware that their child had an account. It shows that there is more that can be done to prevent unapproved access by minors to their sites. A case could be made that if the parents were aware they may have stopped them from using the site if they weren't mature enough to handle it or might have had some other recourse to help them. By not vetting the application process substantially they easily allow anyone to use/abuse the service and potential be caused harm or case harm to others and they can get there, even under age, without anyone responsible knowing they use the service.
Don't get me wrong, the whole process was a pain in the butt. And it seems like a half baked idea which has only been properly applied to Windows Phone at the moment. But, at the end of the day what made it a hassle is really the entire point. There was no easy way for this minor to get access to a set of services that could expose her to dangerous content without a consenting adult helping her to do so.
The controls I think could be more granular and should be applied more widely and to Windows 8/RT and Xbox and on a per device basis as well as with other services like Outlook and Skype. But I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing these sorts of controls on other platforms as well.
Comments
Post a Comment