Apple changes App Store policies to comply with new Texas age verification law

[DragonSlayer101]

In context: Texas passed an age-verification law earlier this year, requiring online app stores to confirm users' ages before allowing software downloads or in-app purchases. The measure aims to protect children from inappropriate online content. Apple has now shared details about how it plans to comply with the law, which takes effect on January 1, 2026.

Once the new law takes effect, Texans creating new Apple accounts will have to verify that they are 18 or older. Younger users must join a Family Sharing group and link their account to a parent or legal guardian. The owner of the linked account will receive a prompt to approve the minor's download requests and in-app purchases.

Developers will also need to implement changes to ensure compliance. To that end, Apple is rolling out the Declared Age Range API, which allows users to share their age range with apps without revealing their exact birth date. Later this year, Apple will release new APIs enabling developers to request parental consent again if an app undergoes significant changes.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the App Store Accountability Act into law in May, pledging to protect children from inappropriate online content. Proponents of SB 2420 say it gives parents greater control over their children's online activities, while opponents warn it could create privacy risks for both adults and children.

Most tech companies pushed back against SB2420 when legislators introduced it last March. Apple CEO Tim Cook personally lobbied Abbott to veto the bill, arguing that collecting sensitive, personally identifiable information could create serious security risks in the future.

In recent years, governments worldwide have increasingly sought to remove internet users' anonymity under the guise of protecting children from harmful content. While Texas will be the first US state to implement this policy, at least 19 others have proposed similar measures, requiring users to verify their age before accessing adult content, social media platforms, or news sites.

In Europe, the UK is now enforcing the Online Safety Act of 2023, requiring adult content websites to implement age verification systems. Enterprising Brits have reportedly circumvented the rules by using VPNs and uploading images of characters from the game Death Stranding instead of sharing their own photos for verification.

Permalink to story:

Apple changes App Store policies to comply with new Texas age verification law

 

[axiomatic13]

Apple doesn't care about the 1st and 4th amendments, either. Apple is an anti-constitutional company.

 

[Str8Shot]

If this was really about age, and not about Big Brother owning more and more information on your and your family (ie. privacy), then they would simply outlaw pornography, violence, etc whatever they’re trying their best to prevent minors from accessing. It’s as simple as that. But of course, we know it’s big business, so that’s not going away anytime soon…

 

[Theinsanegamer]

If this was really about age, and not about Big Brother owning more and more information on your and your family (ie. privacy), then they would simply outlaw pornography, violence, etc whatever they’re trying their best to prevent minors from accessing. It’s as simple as that. But of course, we know it’s big business, so that’s not going away anytime soon…

If it's really about underage people accessing material for adults, why would you just outlaw all that material? Why do all the adults have to go without because you are concerned a child might see it?

Why would you do that over age verification? That doesnt make any sense.

Apple doesn't care about the 1st and 4th amendments, either. Apple is an anti-constitutional company.

That's not how the constitution works. And Apple has repeatedly refused to comply with federal warrants for information, thereby PROTECTING your 4th amendment rights.

But its easy to be mad at the corporation as opposed to the courts that have decided to restrict your rights.

 

[RudyBob]

It's a start

 

[cfenton]

These devices already have extensive parental controls. This law seems entirely unnecessary if the goal is to enable parents to protect their children.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

These devices already have extensive parental controls. This law seems entirely unnecessary if the goal is to enable parents to protect their children.

How do you know an account that is in charge of the parental controls is in fact run by an adult? And as we all know, most parents dont know how to use that and their kids have free reign.

The only ways I can think of to verify age that dont involve ID are even more obtrusive.

 

[gamerk2]

How do you know an account that is in charge of the parental controls is in fact run by an adult? And as we all know, most parents dont know how to use that and their kids have free reign.

The only ways I can think of to verify age that dont involve ID are even more obtrusive.

You're thinking about it all wrong. The solution isn't to accept loosing some of your Constitutional rights because its "the least bad" option; the solution is for parents to do their job and watch over their kids.

 

[BuckarooBonzaii]

The internet has become a maverick and Government does not like it in some ways. It could not be bridled in the past but it looks like it's getting there.

 

[Rudyduu]

Apple doesn't care about the 1st and 4th amendments, either. Apple is an anti-constitutional company.

What does the 1st and 4th amendments have to do with a private company? Both of those amendments have to do with the government not being allowed to do something, it doesn't stop Apple from censoring data on their platforms or gathering and using data they are given by their customers.

That's not how the constitution works. And Apple has repeatedly refused to comply with federal warrants for information, thereby PROTECTING your 4th amendment rights.

That also isn't how the constitution works. Searches and seizures without a warrant and probable cause aren't constitutional, but with a warrant and probable cause they are.

 

[cfenton]

How do you know an account that is in charge of the parental controls is in fact run by an adult? And as we all know, most parents dont know how to use that and their kids have free reign.

The only ways I can think of to verify age that dont involve ID are even more obtrusive.

If the parents don't care enough to learn how to use basic features, they clearly don't care that much about their kids accessing this content. It's not difficult and there are guides if you're having trouble.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

That also isn't how the constitution works. Searches and seizures without a warrant and probable cause aren't constitutional, but with a warrant and probable cause they are.

Right....and Apple said they didnt have probable cause nor a warrant, they just wanted the data. So, thanks to the 4th amendment, Apple told them to go pound sand.

That IS, in fact, how the constitution works : )

You're thinking about it all wrong. The solution isn't to accept loosing some of your Constitutional rights because its "the least bad" option; the solution is for parents to do their job and watch over their kids.

You're not thinking at all. Engage your brain for a minute here:

The state law now mandates these companies validate the age of users. How, exactly, do you propose that Apple does this without ID? I'm sure, if you have an idea, that Apple would love to know.

Also, what Constitutional right do you have to anonymity? Last I checked that didnt exist.

If the parents don't care enough to learn how to use basic features, they clearly don't care that much about their kids accessing this content. It's not difficult and there are guides if you're having trouble.

OK, you're halfway there, now explain how Apple complies with state mandate if the parents dont care enough to manage their kids.

Everyone is tilting at the wrong windmill here. Parents are simply not going to take care of their kids, we have abdicated far too much personal responsibility from people's lives at a societal level. Apple does not have the power to force parents to care for their children, and governments have elected to pass ID laws instead of parenting laws.

You shouldn't be mad at Apple for doing this. You should be mad at legislators for passing these laws in the first place.

 

[cfenton]

OK, you're halfway there, now explain how Apple complies with state mandate if the parents dont care enough to manage their kids.

Everyone is tilting at the wrong windmill here. Parents are simply not going to take care of their kids, we have abdicated far too much personal responsibility from people's lives at a societal level. Apple does not have the power to force parents to care for their children, and governments have elected to pass ID laws instead of parenting laws.

You shouldn't be mad at Apple for doing this. You should be mad at legislators for passing these laws in the first place.

When did I say I was mad at Apple? I said the law is pointless because the tools already exist for parents to restrict the content their children can access.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

When did I say I was mad at Apple? I said the law is pointless because the tools already exist for parents to restrict the content their children can access.

The law isn't pointless, as many parents do not use the controls or dont understand them, so now Apple must verify the age of the accounts with ID.

 

[cfenton]

The law isn't pointless, as many parents do not use the controls or dont understand them, so now Apple must verify the age of the accounts with ID.

But what goal does that achieve that justifies the intrusion? If parents actually cared, they could learn to use the tools that exist. That they don't, means they don't really care, which is why the law is pointless. It doesn't solve a real problem. This just seems like a way for the government of Texas to make it more difficult to view content it doesn't like.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

But what goal does that achieve that justifies the intrusion?

Preventing the underage from viewing adult material.

If parents actually cared, they could learn to use the tools that exist. That they don't, means they don't really care, which is why the law is pointless. It doesn't solve a real problem. This just seems like a way for the government of Texas to make it more difficult to view content it doesn't like.

In the West, Laws are not determined solely by those whom dont care. I'm sure there are plenty of criminals that disagree with the laws they broke too.

A large portion of society disagrees with adult material being freely available to minors. You are free to disagree that is a problem, but depending on where you live, you will be in the minority in that opinion. Texas, and 20 other states, have elected officials that believe this is a problem and they want to crack down on said problem.

 

[cfenton]

Preventing the underage from viewing adult material.

In the West, Laws are not determined solely by those whom dont care. I'm sure there are plenty of criminals that disagree with the laws they broke too.

A large portion of society disagrees with adult material being freely available to minors. You are free to disagree that is a problem, but depending on where you live, you will be in the minority in that opinion. Texas, and 20 other states, have elected officials that believe this is a problem and they want to crack down on said problem.

Then restrict the verification to adult content. I think that's also gross government overreach, but if that's what *****s too stupid to use parental controls want, I guess they can have it. This law requires everyone to verify their age before creating an account. The vast majority of content on the App Store isn't adult content (is any of it?) and I shouldn't have to give Apple or anyone else a copy of my ID to view it.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Then restrict the verification to adult content.

The law says that these platforms have to verify the age of their users. So that is what they are doing.

I think that's also gross government overreach, but if that's what *****s too stupid to use parental controls want, I guess they can have it.

I also agree that it is overreach, but you need to understand that there are LOTS of people who vote, not just parents who dont understand technology. Again, this is not Apple's problem.

This law requires everyone to verify their age before creating an account. The vast majority of content on the App Store isn't adult content (is any of it?) and I shouldn't have to give Apple or anyone else a copy of my ID to view it.

So you shouldn't have to follow the law because you disagree with it? I disagree with speed limits does that mean I can drive however fast I want?

If you disagree with this, you need to direct that anger at the politicians passing the law. Apple is complying with the law, and isnt going to make an exception for it because you feel you shouldnt have to do it. You can say its stupid and pointless and whatever else, but Apple is complying with the law. It's not stupid or pointless for Apple to do it.

 

[cfenton]

The law says that these platforms have to verify the age of their users. So that is what they are doing.

I also agree that it is overreach, but you need to understand that there are LOTS of people who vote, not just parents who dont understand technology. Again, this is not Apple's problem.

So you shouldn't have to follow the law because you disagree with it? I disagree with speed limits does that mean I can drive however fast I want?

If you disagree with this, you need to direct that anger at the politicians passing the law. Apple is complying with the law, and isnt going to make an exception for it because you feel you shouldnt have to do it. You can say its stupid and pointless and whatever else, but Apple is complying with the law. It's not stupid or pointless for Apple to do it.

You're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I've not once blamed Apple. I'm not arguing that people don't have to obey laws they don't agree with. I'm clearly criticizing the law. The law is bad.

 

[gamerk2]

Also, what Constitutional right do you have to anonymity? Last I checked that didnt exist.

Just because a right not explicit in the Constitution does not mean it doesn't exist. This logic is *exactly* why some in the Federalist party hated the Bill or Rights, since they worried the presence of some explicit protections would eventually be used as an argument to deny other protections that exist.

Put simply: the right to privacy would be covered by both the 9th Amendment, and protections inherited from English Common Law.

 

[axiomatic13]

If it's really about underage people accessing material for adults, why would you just outlaw all that material? Why do all the adults have to go without because you are concerned a child might see it?

Why would you do that over age verification? That doesnt make any sense.
That's not how the constitution works. And Apple has repeatedly refused to comply with federal warrants for information, thereby PROTECTING your 4th amendment rights.

But its easy to be mad at the corporation as opposed to the courts that have decided to restrict your rights.

I was referring to the ICE warning app. Removing it is a violation of the 1st and 4th. Apple has bowed to a tiny handed false king with the temperament of a two-year-old.