TikTok to be hit by a UK class-action-style lawsuit backed by the Children's Commissioner Chinese social media app TikTok is to be sued in the High Court as part of a class-action-style lawsuit due to be publicised by England's Children's Commissioner. The case, filed two weeks before the end of 2020, was revealed because the person bringing it is an anonymised 12-year-old girl from London who acts with the backing …
I don't use TikTok (and based on some of their other actions, I wouldn't want to defend them), but I've just checked and their relevant terms of service appear to be:
Minimum user age 13, and anyone under 18 needs parental consent.
Don't see how a 12 year old should have any case against them. Another case of someone circumventing the rules and later on getting upset that they were allowed to. I feel that this is another attempt by the Children's Commissioner to force mandatory age checks (that cannot be lied to) everywhere online.
Totally agree.
If the case succeeds then it could set a precedent. The only argument I can see for the case to succeed would be that tiktok did not carry out sufficient age verification. But if that is the case then the impact would have to be that all online services with age restrictions would be liable were they to allow underage individuals to sign up. Which in turn would not only impact social media but absolutely anything with an age limit. iPlayer or All4 for example. It's pretty easy to sign up for an account on services like this without any age verification other then ticking a box that says "I confirm that I am at least X years of age" or indeed filling in a date of birth field. Plus of course clicking something similar when viewing content with an age limit. At the moment the providers are protected by the fact that the boxes and/or fields were filled in. But the argument here seems to be that the contracts are not valid because the person who signed up was actually below the age of responsibility and therefore not liable.
"If there are 4.4 million claimants, each entitled to several hundred pounds, under the current damages-based regime the maximum share is 50 per cent. "
What is this "maximum share" nonsense ? If it a class action, then it is the entire class that is concerned. What is the justification for one (small) group getting 50% ?
How is that justice ?
It is clear the Class Action lawsuits have just become excuses for making money for people who are in no way concerned by the issue they raise.
And private companies funding government procedures ? They should be thanked for their generous donation and told to fuck off.
The world is going mad, I tell you. Mad.
Get off my lawn.
Isn't it because the small group is funding the action for all the others? So basically saying "If I/we hadn't paid for your lawsuit you wouldn't have gotten anything at all, so I'm entitled to some of your profits" sorry "some of your Damages"?
Brings a new meaning to "profiting from the proceeds of crime" I suppose.
It seems a simple option to all of this is to be 18 to use any and all social media. Of course, the media companies will not enforce that as they will lose revenue from all that filthy data. Whilst I have no particular love for social media (although it does have its uses), this case should be thrown out. It is about time parents started parenting and controlling their DNA instead of abdicating all responsibility, then moaning about it afterwards!
Those are my thoughts exactly, why should the responsibility of what your children does be with someone else, it's the parents responsibility to check on them, and educate them. Sure, there are a lot of risks everywhere, that's why that parental supervision and education is needed.
In the UK is 7 - but until they reach 18 (the age of majority) they can cancel at any time as it is presumed that they do not understand the implications of entering into the contract.
So: if a minor cancels - will TikTok/whoever have to delete all information that they have learned about the child ?
What about personal information gleaned about someone who has not entered a contract, be they minors or not - think facebook shadow profiles which probably take copies of personal data out side of the UK/EEA which is illegal. Facebook is fighting the Irish data protection authority over this - so it probably does move data out of the EEA.
Others are just as bad or worse, start with Google.
I doubt that many really implement Art. 17 of the GDPR (right to be forgotten)
ISTM that adults are just as succeptible to having their personal details harvested and misused as children are. Perhaps even more so in the reasonably common situation where the child is far more tech-savvy than the adult.
The effects of mis-use of personal data is also likely to do more harm to adults than children.
"the child is far more tech-savvy than the adult".
Knowing which buttons to press does not make children better at understanding the terms and conditions they are expected to read and accept. Add that parents often don't care about how their issue amuse themselves with tech and you could ask why should adults be treated differently [to children].
"
Knowing which buttons to press does not make children better at understanding the terms and conditions they are expected to read and accept.
"
It makes no difference whether an adult is more capable of understanding something they didn't read than a child. The child is however often far more aware of who their data is visible to than an adult, which is the crux of the issue.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
