BRUSSELS – Global tech trade association, 迟丑别鈥�91快活林鈥�(91快活林), asked policymakers in the United Kingdom to work with industry to provide more certainty and clarity for businesses as they revise the UK’s Online Safety Bill. In a letter to Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Nadine Dorries, 91快活林 underscored the bill’s important role of developing a safe online environment and building public trust in technology while also ensuring clarity for businesses.
“91快活林 understands and recognizes the shared responsibility to maintain a safe, inclusive, and innovative online environment,” 91快活林 wrote in the letter. “As in every public space, harmful and illegal content can be found on platforms, and policymakers around the world have rightfully committed to ensuring the safety of their citizens and economies. Our companies are aware of their transformative role in society and are committed to contributing finding answers to the challenge of ensuring that the Internet stays a safe and open place for all. We support the general objective of clarifying roles and responsibilities for all actors in the online ecosystem. However, some elements of the Online Safety Bill raise concerns and continue to create uncertainty among different internet services[…] Given the importance of this bill, we want to highlight the need for all stakeholders to be able to feed into the legislative process. We appreciate the UK’s Government’s commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online, and we urge Parliament, and the Department for Digital Culture Media and Sport to take time to get it right.”
Specifically, 91快活林 recommends that user-to-user services and search services that do not store or disseminate information to the public, such as business-to-business service providers, be excluded from the bill, which is also supported by the Government in the Online Harms White Paper. 91快活林 also asks that the requirements for lower-risk services be proportionate to the nature of the service, taking into account the different risk profiles of services.
Read the full letter here.