The Innocence Act amends existing Ohio Revised Code sections and introduces several new provisions to create stricter penalties for organizations that fail to verify a user's age effectively. By instituting civil actions for victims of violations, the bill not only establishes criminal repercussions but also empowers individuals to seek damages in civil court. This dual approach broadens the scope of legal recourse available for victims of digitally disseminated obscene materials, contributing to a more comprehensive protective framework for juveniles online.
Summary
House Bill 295, known as the Innocence Act, seeks to enhance protections for minors against exposure to obscene or harmful materials available online. The legislation mandates that organizations providing such materials verify the age of individuals attempting to access them, thereby ensuring only those eighteen years or older can gain access. Failure to comply with this requirement can result in significant criminal penalties, including felonies for organizations and misdemeanors for individuals attempting to access material with false identification. The bill emphasizes accountability for both organizations and individuals in preventing access to harmful content by younger users.
Contention
Despite its protective intent, the legislation faces concerns regarding its practicality and potential overreach. Critics argue that the stringent age verification process may impose unreasonable burdens on businesses, particularly smaller organizations or startups that may not have the resources to comply with extensive verification systems. Additionally, there is apprehension about the implications for privacy and the handling of personal data collected during the age verification process. The balance between safeguarding minors and ensuring businesses can operate without excessive regulation remains a point of contention in discussions surrounding the bill.