#privacy violations

[rejectingrepublicans]

[coochiequeens]

Council of Europe unveils roadmap to tackle online violence against women and girls

<p>Abuse driven not just by misogyny, but by financial gain</p>

Council of Europe Strasbourg 11 June 2026

Women are being pushed from online spaces, harming democracy

The Council of Europe has launched a new recommendation aimed at strengthening accountability for technology-facilitated violence against women and girls, a rapidly growing form of abuse that increasingly threatens women's safety, dignity and participation in public life.

Technology-facilitated violence includes cyberstalking, online harassment, the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, privacy violations, misogynistic hate campaigns, threats and image manipulation. Such abuse often accompanies other forms of violence, including domestic violence, allowing perpetrators to extend surveillance, coercion and control through digital tools.

Europe comes together against online violence against women and girls

Many representatives of the Council of Europe’s 46 member countries attended the 10 June launch, which was held online and at the Council of Europe’s headquarters in Strasbourg.  Featured speakers at the event praised the recommendation, adopted by the Committee of Ministers in March, for providing guidance to European countries on preventing and combating violence committed, assisted, aggravated or amplified through digital technologies. It also sets out measures to ensure that perpetrators, facilitators and, where appropriate, technology companies are held accountable.

Catherine Van De Heyning, Professor of European fundamental rights law at the University of Antwerp and Deputy Public Prosecutor in Antwerp's cybercrime division, described the recommendation as “a major step forward in ensuring that justice systems are equipped to respond effectively to technology-facilitated violence against women and girls.”

She highlighted emerging forms of abuse driven not only by misogyny or harassment, but also by financial gain, citing a recent case in which Belgian authorities arrested a Dutch national accused of operating Telegram groups that distributed and sold intimate images and personal information of women without their consent.

Online violence harming women in public life

The recommendation warns that technology-facilitated violence can lead to anxiety, depression, reputational harm, economic loss and withdrawal from online spaces. It also notes that women in public life are particularly affected, including journalists, politicians, human-rights defenders and women’s rights activists, who are frequently targeted by coordinated online attacks intended to intimidate or silence them.

To address these challenges, the recommendation calls for stronger laws and policies, effective investigations and access to justice, improved support services for victims, enhanced international cooperation and greater responsibility for technology companies and online platforms. It also promotes prevention through education, digital literacy and awareness-raising.

Also participating in the launch, María Rún Bjarnadóttir, head of legal at the Office of the national commissioner of the Icelandic police and a member of the Council of Europe’s GREVIO monitoring body (which deals with violence against women) stressed the need to strengthen law-enforcement capacity and to keep pace with rapidly evolving technologies such as digital forensic expertise.

The recommendation forms part of the Council of Europe's broader efforts to ensure that women and girls can participate fully, equally and safely in the digital environment and that technological innovation advances human rights rather than undermining them.

Brazil Steps Up Regulation of Violence Against Women in the Digital Environment

On 20 May 2026, Brazil adopted Presidential Decree No. 12,976, establishing a comprehensive framework to address violence against women onli

By Diego Bonomo, Jadzia Pierce, Gustavo Akkerman & Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses on June 11, 2026

Posted in International, Uncategorized

On 20 May 2026, Brazil adopted Presidential Decree No. 12,976, establishing a comprehensive framework to address violence against women online. Adopted alongside a parallel decree (No. 12,975) reforming intermediary liability, it reflects a more assertive approach to regulating online harms, including those driven or amplified by AI. Together, these measures will require companies to reassess internal processes to ensure rapid content removal and more proactive monitoring, including for AI‑enabled services.

While framed as a gender‑based violence measure, the Decree reflects a broader shift in regulatory expectations from reactive moderation to proactive platform duties and systemic accountability. It also forms part of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s administration’s broader efforts, ongoing since 2023, to regulate social media in the absence of comprehensive legislation. This approach has already triggered constitutional and policy debate, including regarding the use of presidential decrees to impose substantive obligations and potential implications for freedom of expression.

A broad, technology‑aware definition of digital violence

A key feature of the Decree is its expansive definition of “violence against women in the digital environment.” It goes beyond traditional offences such as harassment or threats to include conduct causing physical, psychological, political or economic harm, including where amplified by digital technologies.

The Decree expressly covers AI‑generated or manipulated content, such as synthetic intimate images and AI‑enabled harassment. This effectively integrates AI‑related harms into mainstream online safety rules rather than treating them separately. The framework is grounded in principles such as victim protection, privacy, and the prohibition of re‑victimisation.

From notice-and-action to structured platform duties

The Decree introduces a more structured regime for platforms hosting user‑generated content. In particular, platforms must:

provide accessible reporting channels;

assess and respond to notifications promptly;

communicate decisions and reasoning to both notifier and user; and

direct users to appropriate support services.

Platforms may retain content where there is reasonable doubt as to its illegality, provided the decision is justified and communicated, preserving proportionality and procedural fairness.

These obligations should be read in light of a 2025 Brazilian Supreme Court decision that significantly limited the traditional “safe harbor” under Article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet. Under that regime, platforms were generally only liable for third‑party content if they failed to comply with a court‑ordered takedown. The Court’s decision departs from this approach, indicating that platforms may be required to remove unlawful content directly, including upon user notice, without prior judicial intervention, and introducing a broader “duty of care” (dever de cuidado). While not expressly codified, the Decree clearly reflects and operationalizes this shift by embedding more structured notice-handling accountability requirements.

Systemic liability and design‑level accountability

The Decree introduces a form of systemic liability, focusing on whether platforms implement adequate measures to prevent or limit harm at scale. The assessment shifts from individual moderation decisions to the effectiveness of systems, processes and safeguards.

Crucially, isolated incidents are unlikely to trigger liability on their own. Instead, the focus is on whether the platform’s systems, processes, and technical measures are sufficiently robust and effective.

Rapid removal obligations for intimate content

The Decree imposes particularly strict requirements for non‑consensual intimate content. Platforms must:

remove the content within two hours of notification; and

ensure that the content is technically marked and blocked from re-upload across the service.

This combination of rapid response and forward-looking prevention is significant. It reflects an understanding that harm in the digital environment is not limited to initial publication, but is exacerbated by repeated dissemination. From an operational perspective, this may involve techniques such as automated detection, hashing technologies, and cross-platform content identification tools.

Proactive duties and coordinated harassment

Another important departure from traditional models is the introduction of proactive monitoring obligations. Platforms are required to identify indicators of coordinated harassment campaigns and to take proportionate measures to reduce the reach and visibility of harmful content. Notably, these obligations apply even in the absence of a complaint from the victim. Platforms are therefore expected to act ex officio where they detect patterns suggesting coordinated abuse.

The Decree places particular emphasis on protecting women with public exposure, such as journalists or political figures, reflecting concerns around the use of online harassment to silence participation in public life.

Targeted regulation of AI-generated harms

The Decree also addresses certain risks associated with AI-generated content. It prohibits the generation or modification of intimate content involving third parties without consent and requires platforms offering AI-based functionalities to implement technical and procedural safeguards to detect and block harmful outputs. These safeguards must be deployed in a manner proportionate to the scale and risk profile of the service.

These provisions are particularly noteworthy in light of ongoing global debates around deepfakes and generative AI misuse. They signal an expectation that platforms will not only moderate harmful outputs, but also actively design their systems to prevent such outputs from being generated in the first place.

Enforcement and broader policy approach

Enforcement of the Decree is entrusted to Brazil’s Data Protection Authority (ANPD), which reflects a broader trend toward regulatory consolidation with the ANPD increasingly positioned at the intersection of data protection, online safety, and, potentially, future AI governance. In parallel, the Decree provides for the development of a coordinated framework through which multiple public authorities would work together on prevention, protection, and victim support. It requires the Ministry of Justice and Public Security to establish an interministerial working group, which will be tasked with designing the structure and implementation of this framework.

Parallel reform of intermediary liability

The Decree was adopted alongside a separate measure (Decree No. 12,975) amending Brazil’s framework under the 2014 Civil Rights Framework for the Internet (Marco Civil da Internet), following the abovementioned 2025 Supreme Court decision that significantly limited the traditional court‑order‑based safe harbor for online platforms.

While the previous regime largely conditioned liability on failure to comply with a judicial takedown order, the new framework introduces more structured due diligence and organizational obligations. It clarifies that liability may arise in cases of systemic failure to prevent or address certain categories of illegal content, including terrorism, child exploitation, hate speech and gender‑based violence.

Platforms must, in particular, appoint a local legal representative, maintain notice‑and‑action mechanisms, implement ongoing risk monitoring and mitigation measures, and increase transparency around content moderation, advertising and systemic risks.

Taken together, these developments point to a broader shift toward a proactive, risk‑based model of platform accountability, moving beyond purely reactive or court‑driven enforcement. This approach shows clear parallels with developments in the EU, in particular under the Digital Services Act, which similarly emphasizes systemic risk management, transparency and proactive obligations for platforms, as well as ongoing discussions under the AI Act regarding AI‑generated content and safety‑by‑design requirements.

*              *              *

The Covington team continues to monitor developments in the area of digital services, content moderation and AI‑driven content closely and would be happy to assist companies in assessing the implications of this decree for their products, policies, and compliance strategies.

[hannahhook7744]

Malaysia enforces ban on social media accounts for children younger than 16:

“Malaysia on Monday began enforcing rules barring millions of children younger than 16 from having social media accounts, joining a global effort to tighten online safety protections for young users.”

“The rules require social media platforms with at least 8 million users, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, to implement age-verification systems and block users under 16 from creating accounts.”

“Malaysia’s Communications and Multimedia Commission said Monday that age verification for existing users will be rolled out progressively over the next six months.

Users identified as under 16 will have a month to download or transfer their data, including photos and videos, before any restrictions, suspensions or other actions are applied, it said in a statement.

Companies that fail to comply could face penalties of up to 10 million ringgit ($2.5 million).

But parents whose children manage to bypass the law will not be penalized.”

“The government said the measures are aimed at protecting children from harmful content, cyberbullying and platform features designed to encourage excessive use.”

“The regulator said the rules are not intended to prevent children from accessing digital technology.

“These measures help strengthen the protection of children in the online environment, while providing added reassurance to parents in navigating increasingly complex digital risks,” it has said.”

“Platforms are required to improve user safety, discourage excessive use and take action against underage accounts and harmful content.”

Clara Koh, Meta’s director of public policy for Southeast Asia has warned about blanket bans pushing kids away from protected sites

Malaysia enforces ban on social media accounts for children younger than 16

It’s the latest country to enact a ban as governments face growing pressure to address concerns about social media’s impact on young people’

[pumpkinofthedale]

California is Requiring all Operating Systems to Enact Age Verification

California introduces age verification law for all operating systems, including Linux and SteamOS — user age verified during OS account setu

AB 1043 also requires OS providers to pipe a real-time age checker to every app developer who requests it.

California signed into law Assembly Bill 1043: The Digital Age Assurance Act which will require ALL operating systems to perform age verification as of January 1, 2027.

Colorado is attempting to pass a similar bill:

Colorado Lawmakers Push for Age Verification at the Operating System Level

Rather than having people verify their age on every app they use, Colorado's SB26-051 would implement a way for devices to share an 'age-bra

People in California and Colorado, please contact your legislators to let them know that this is not acceptable.

Everyone else, keep eyes on your own state bills if possible. Please support organizations fighting for your right to privacy like The EFF:

Electronic Frontier Foundation

Defending your rights in the digital world

[jaydove-writes]

I'm not Australian so I don't know much about this but apparently there's a push for a new law that would make all social media users have to use IDs? This is already a policy for Facebook but your username on Facebook is your real name anyway. On sites like Tumblr, people want to remain anonymous. While I personally don't care about anonymity, this could out teenagers to their parents as LGBTQ+ and make them a bigger target for bullying. If you are Australian or otherwise more knowledgeable about this bill, let me know more about it so I can help.

[thoughtlessarse]

Dutch Tax Authority and Police named biggest privacy violators of 2025

The Dutch Tax Authority and the National Police were named the largest privacy violators of 2025 at the Big Brother Awards, an annual prize

The Dutch Tax Authority and the National Police were named the largest privacy violators of 2025 at the Big Brother Awards, an annual prize recognizing organizations or individuals that infringe on digital rights and privacy. The awards were presented at the Vlaams Cultuurhuis de Brakke Grond in Amsterdam. Digital rights group Bits of Freedom has been giving the awards for 20 years to highlight breaches of citizens’ digital rights. This year, both the police and the Tax Authority were singled out, while other recipients received honorable mentions for defending privacy. The National Police won the public award with 30 percent of the votes. Bits of Freedom cited the police for monitoring activists on social media and then visiting them at home without legal authorization. Evelyn Austin, director of Bits of Freedom, said, “The lack of police awareness of this unequal power dynamic is appalling. Unannounced police visits are intimidating and can prevent people from exercising their right to demonstrate or freedom of expression.” The expert award, selected by a four-member jury, went to the Dutch Tax Authority. The jury criticized the agency for continuing to use algorithms unlawfully even after the childcare benefits scandal. “Given the known consequences of discriminatory algorithms, this appears deliberate,” the jury said, adding that the agency shows little sign of learning from past mistakes.

continue reading

[hedgewitchnecromancer]

Hey just as a warning, LinkedIn is scanning your entire computer and not telling you every single time you open it

Here’s a video explaining it if you don’t want to deal with the full webpage

[boyslit]

*Please turn off adblocker for just this video bc Ad revenue is being dontated to the Immune Deficiency Foundation! (she is on the verge of tears the whole time tho so Caveat Auditor)

Ok I don't know how much tumblr cares about VTubers generally but I know there's folks here that care about 1. workers' rights and 2. charity defraudment!

TL;DW/DR: VTuber management company Vshojo owes IronMouse an undisclosed amount of backpay and 515,000USD to a charity, Immune Deficiency Foundation. Following advice from her attorney, that is all the info she can give out right now. There are also allegations of employees leaking their streamers' IRL private info.

Here's the donation link for the foundation if you'd like:

Give | Immune Deficiency Foundation

Explore the multiple ways you can donate to help people living with primary immunodeficiencies (PI).

More detailed summary with links under the cut. (Links look like this for visibility/ease of finding)

Situation Summary: VTuber Iron Mouse raised over 500,000 USD (yes that's half a million dollar dollar bills) with her friend CDawgVA for the Immune Deficiency Foundation who helped her out when she first started having health troubles. She explained in the video she has a primary immune deficiency conition called CVID. The money was supposed to be collected and donated through VShojo. This fundraising was done over a year ago and has not been paid out to the charity.

VShojo has also not been paying Iron Mouse for several months. Iron Mouse is one of their top talents. If they think they can get away with doing this to her .... then what else are they doing to all their other streamers?

There are also allegations that an employee has leaked their other talents' real life private info although it seems this may have happened to the Japanese streamers (VShojo operates in both countries). More is detailed in this article.

And I'm not a big stream watcher. I mostly save my energy for friends' streams and smaller streamers engaging with media I'm hyperfixated on. But this shouldn't fucking happen to anyone, ever. And certainly not to an immunocomprimised girl who helps raise insane amounts of money for charity and only started streaming to find some friends.

I really thought I'd seen all the cartoon evil the world could offer when we got our current US government regime. smh

Stay mad. Donate to health charities if you can. Keep pushing for workers' rights and financial transparency for corporations. Thanks for reading.