California Moves To Exempt Linux From Upcoming Age-Verification Law (tomshardware.com) 36
California lawmakers are moving to exempt most open-source operating systems from the state's upcoming age-verification law after backlash from Linux and privacy advocates who warned that the original rules could force decentralized projects to collect users' ages. The amendment would likely shield major Linux distributions, though SteamOS and other Linux-based platforms tied to proprietary app stores may still face compliance questions. Tom's Hardware reports: Assembly Bill 1856 (AB 1856), currently moving through California's legislature ahead of committee reviews in June, would amend the state's earlier age-assurance law by excluding software distributed under licenses that allow users to "copy, redistribute, and modify the software." The proposed amendment specifically states: "Operating system provider" does not mean a person or entity that distributes an operating system or application under license terms that permit a recipient to copy, redistribute, and modify the software.
The amendment follows months of backlash after California passed the original Assembly Bill 1043 (AB 1043), formally known as the Digital Age Assurance Act, in late 2025. The law sought to shift online age verification away from individual websites and apps and down to the operating-system level instead. Under the original law, operating systems would be required to request a user's age or birth date during device setup, then expose an "age bracket signal" to apps and app stores. The law, which defined brackets such as "under 13," "13-15," "16-17," and "18+," immediately raised questions about how such requirements would apply to decentralized, open-source software ecosystems. [...]
AB 1856 does not repeal the original Digital Age Assurance Act. Instead, it narrows the definition of who qualifies as an "operating system provider" under the law. Commercial platforms with proprietary app ecosystems could remain subject to California's age-assurance requirements even if most open-source Linux distributions are ultimately exempted. California Assembly Member Buffy Wicks introduced the amendment on February 11, 2026. However, the open-source exemption language appeared in later revisions that began drawing attention across Linux and privacy communities. The latest version is dated May 18, 2026, and as of May 19, 2026, the bill was read a second time and ordered to third reading.
The amendment follows months of backlash after California passed the original Assembly Bill 1043 (AB 1043), formally known as the Digital Age Assurance Act, in late 2025. The law sought to shift online age verification away from individual websites and apps and down to the operating-system level instead. Under the original law, operating systems would be required to request a user's age or birth date during device setup, then expose an "age bracket signal" to apps and app stores. The law, which defined brackets such as "under 13," "13-15," "16-17," and "18+," immediately raised questions about how such requirements would apply to decentralized, open-source software ecosystems. [...]
AB 1856 does not repeal the original Digital Age Assurance Act. Instead, it narrows the definition of who qualifies as an "operating system provider" under the law. Commercial platforms with proprietary app ecosystems could remain subject to California's age-assurance requirements even if most open-source Linux distributions are ultimately exempted. California Assembly Member Buffy Wicks introduced the amendment on February 11, 2026. However, the open-source exemption language appeared in later revisions that began drawing attention across Linux and privacy communities. The latest version is dated May 18, 2026, and as of May 19, 2026, the bill was read a second time and ordered to third reading.
Re: (Score:1)
This should not be acceptble... (Score:3, Insightful)
This should not be acceptable. Carve-outs are always temporary. Always. Do not give them an inch. This is just large media companies like Meta, Tiktok, and Youtube pushing responsibility for verifying their users are old enough onto someone else to dodge liability for the addictive garbage they produce.
Re: (Score:2)
how can that be, do parents let kids setup their devices?
Re: (Score:2)
No responsible parent would do such a thing. And any reasonably intelligent kid will get around whatever the parents did, or the kid will ask a reasonably intelligent friend to do it for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if the parent's set-up the phone with all the parental controls, if they can send a text to a friend, the friend can walk the kid through how to bypass the parental controls.
If it's up to the OS, that only works if it's an app... otherwise the OS is going to have to hook into Chrome or Edge and monitor every single web request.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: This should not be acceptble... (Score:2)
Most, but not all, kids of the current generation are neither knowledgeable in computers or interested in learning. People just want to connect with friends on their phone and play games.
Re: (Score:2)
This is just large media companies like Meta, Tiktok, and Youtube pushing responsibility for verifying their users are old enough onto someone else to dodge liability for the addictive garbage they produce.
Because having to verify your age with multiple different companies is clearly superior to just doing it once and being done with it?
Look, I get it when some people say they don't want any age checks. That's how the internet used to work, and it's not entirely unreasonable to place the burden of parenting (ie keeping kids away from age inappropriate content by enabling the appropriate parental controls) on parents. But a few states already have age gate laws that work the way you're describing (at the sit
Good laws need no exceptions (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because, it's California, and the Governor and mayors can't put the responsibility for actually taking care of their kids and making sure they aren't on a website "that could be dangerous".
Remember, everything in Cali might give you cancer!
Re: California (Score:2)
Because solving housing, water, land use, power, and jobs are problems beyond what most of the scum in Sacremento can solve. So they find all these little pet projects because they have a lot of free time on their hands. A true Idiocracy, being ruled by the most incompetent.
Age Verification for any OS is insane (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Blue state BS
Texas [reddit.com] and Florida [x.com] aren't blue states.
Re: Age Verification for any OS is insane (Score:2)
Number of laws are similar between Red and Blue states. Don't buy into propaganda designed to force you to pick a team instead of thinking (and voting) for yourself.
The Democratic machine in California is corrupt and lives off big donor money from major industry. Similar story for the GOP in the states where they hold a significant majority.
If they have written this badly enough... (Score:3)
If they have written this badly enough, then no device running a Linux kernel will have to support this. This includes phones, tvs, and tablets, which is probably 99% of streaming video use.
It's a trap law (Score:2)
I'm not surprised their quietly gutting the law. It's what I predicted.
It's not Age Verification (Score:2)
AB-1856 (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1856) is titled "Age verification signals: software applications and online services", but that's primarily for show. The key part of the proposed law says:
There is no verification of age. It's self-report of age at OS setup. There is no verification required by this code. The OS then provides age bracket range upon request.
Kids will now become Linux savvy. (Score:2)
Windows 11 is already getting plenty of bad vibes. Now add the "age check" defect and there will be widespread moving over to Linux. Also, this will encourage SteamOS to support more than their own store to get around this.
I was wondering how FreeDOS would handle this (Score:2)