The War on Porn Regular Updates about the Assault on The Adult Industry

LOS ANGELES—Collective Shout, an Australian anti-pornography group, announced Thursday that it successfully pressured Honey Birdette, the Playboy-owned lingerie retailer, to withdraw certain advertising from a shopping mall near Perth.

The group described the outcome as a “flash win” in its campaign against what it called “porn-themed” marketing.

Collective Shout, co-founded by self-described “pro-life feminist” Melinda Tankard Reist, positions itself as a prominent anti-pornography organization in Australia and has often compared its efforts to similar conservative-led advocacy groups in the United States.

Honey Birdette has been in Collective Shout’s crosshairs for years. In August 2025, the group objected to the retailer’s advertising of lingerie products featuring BDSM-inspired accessories such as chains, collars, and leashes. The complaint was filed with Australia’s advertising industry regulatory body, Ad Standards, which later closed the matter after Honey Birdette addressed the concerns. Similar cases have been raised by Collective Shout against the brand multiple times in the past.

“Playboy-owned sex shop Honey Birdette has been forced to remove two porn-style shop window ads following our reports to Ad Standards,” the blog post declared. “The ads promoting a range called ‘Sumi – Leopard’ featured objectifying portrayals of naked women.”

The complaint targeted ads promoting Honey Birdette’s Sumi collection, which the company describes as “inspired by sheer bodysuits and bodystockings.” The line includes lingerie sets, catsuits, headpieces, and other items in black and leopard print designs.

Collective Shout said the ads objectified women and were inappropriate for children visiting the Perth shopping mall. The group emphasized that the ads were displayed in close proximity to a children’s stage show, describing the venue as a “family shopping center.”

While the group highlighted this proximity in its complaint, it did not provide exact measurements of the distance between the advertisements and the stage show. Still, Ad Standards acted quickly after receiving the reports.

“Less than 24 hours after lodging our reports, Ad Standards replied with a notice advising that Honey Birdette had confirmed the ads had been ‘modified or removed and the original advertisement will not be used again on this medium,’” Collective Shout wrote in its post.

Following the removal, the group is now urging its supporters to continue the campaign by filing additional complaints with Ad Standards and petitioning executives of the shopping center’s parent company to suspend Honey Birdette’s marketing campaigns across all of their properties in Australia.

Honey Birdette, founded in 2006 in Australia, was acquired in 2021 by the NASDAQ-listed PLBY Group, parent company of Playboy and other brands, as part of a strategy to expand its global retail footprint and e-commerce operations. The lingerie chain operates stores across Australia as well as in the United States and other international markets.

RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva on Wednesday signed into law new rules governing the use of social media, online video games and other digital services by children and adolescents.

Known as the “Adultization Bill” — shorthand in Brazil for its goal of protecting minors from premature exposure to adult content — or “Digital ECA,” for updating a 1990 statute that guarantees fundamental rights for children and adolescents, the law will take effect in 180 days.

In his speech, Lula said the measure represents a step toward Brazil’s digital sovereignty and emphasized that foreign companies are welcome as long as they comply with national laws. He criticized Big Tech’s lack of self-regulation, defended stronger protections for children and announced a provisional decree elevating the National Data Protection Authority into an autonomous agency.

“Freedom of expression is a nonnegotiable value, but it cannot serve as an excuse for committing crimes in the digital world,” Lula said.

The law obliges digital platforms to adopt safeguards, limits the collection of data from minors and sets tough penalties for violations. Companies are required to take “reasonable steps” to prevent children and adolescents from being exposed to illegal or inappropriate content, including sexual exploitation, harassment, violence, self-harm, gambling, deceptive advertising and other predatory practices.

Parental controls must be provided and set by default to the highest protection level, including time limits, blocking geolocation, restricting unauthorized adult contacts and controlling content recommendations.

Age verification is now mandatory. Until now, most platforms relied on self-declaration, with users merely confirming they were over 18. The new law bans that practice and requires stronger mechanisms, still to be defined by regulators, to prevent minors from accessing harmful content.

In addition, accounts of users under 16 must be linked to responsible adults, who will receive reports and be able to restrict interactions.

Noncompliance may result in fines of up to 10% of a company’s Brazilian revenue, capped at $10 million per violation, according to Stephanie Almeida, a lawyer at São Paulo-based Poliszezuk Advogados specializing in civil and corporate law.

Luiza Teixeira, a child protection specialist at UNICEF Brazil, described the law as “very robust, with high technical quality.” She acknowledged that digital technologies provide opportunities for learning, expression and connection but warned of serious risks as well.

According to João Victor Archegas, a lawyer and researcher at the Institute for Technology and Society in Rio de Janeiro, the new legislation is more specific than earlier frameworks such as the Statute of Children and Adolescents, the Brazilian Internet Bill of Rights and the General Data Protection Law.

“These are important legal frameworks in the country, because they address protection of fundamental rights online and of minors,” he said. “But there was still a lack of specific normative language on the use of social media and digital platforms by this audience.”

The bill was introduced in 2022 but gained momentum in August 2025 after influencer Felipe Bressanim Pereira, known as Felca, published a viral video exposing cases of child exploitation online. Public debate intensified following the arrest of influencer Hytalo Santos on Aug. 15, accused of producing and sharing sexual content involving minors.

Data from SaferNet Brasil, which monitors human rights violations online, highlights the scale of the problem. Between Jan. 1 and July 31, 2025, it recorded 76,997 reports, with 49,336 (64%) related to child sexual abuse and exploitation. After Felca’s video went viral, reports of child pornography more than doubled.

Teixeira warned that generative artificial intelligence has amplified risks by enabling the manipulation of harmless images of children into sexualized material that circulates openly on pedophile networks. “Contrary to common belief, it is not just on the dark web,” she said.

After the public outcry, the lower house approved the bill on Aug. 21 with minor amendments, and the Senate quickly confirmed it before sending it to the president. During debate, some lawmakers cautioned about potential overreach in internet regulation.

“The bill was seen by some as a ‘thermometer’ for broader regulation of Big Tech in Brazil,” Almeida said. “Opponents argue that the text, in its current form, could open precedents for restricting freedom of expression, while supporters stress that the proposal actually seeks to restore parents’ power to oversee their children’s digital lives.”

Ariel de Castro Alves, one of Brazil’s leading child rights experts, stressed that the law is only a first step. “The internet cannot be a lawless land,” he said.

Alves explained that companies will need systems for removing harmful content, technical teams dedicated to child safety, effective reporting channels, and investments in protective measures. They “can no longer simply profit from views, engagement and boosted content” that violate children’s rights.

He added that Brazil should also adopt a content rating system similar to that used for television and include safe internet education in school curricula.

Teixeira noted that the law “put Brazil on equal footing with other countries that already had a robust legal and political framework for protecting children and adolescents online, such as England,” but warned that the main challenge will be “to regulate and put it into practice.”

Archegas highlighted three key difficulties: developing effective age verification without creating digital exclusion or excessive surveillance, managing the economic burden of adapting global platforms to Brazil’s requirements, and ensuring enforcement so that the rules are more than symbolic.

Strike 3 Holdings, a company that describes its films as “high quality,” “feminist,” and “ethical” adult videos, has filed a lawsuit against Meta in federal court in California, accusing the tech giant of infringing its copyrights by using Strike 3’s content to train artificial intelligence models. The complaint, filed in July, claims Meta has been torrenting and seeding the company’s videos since 2018. Supporting exhibits and details were unsealed last week.

According to the lawsuit, Meta sought Strike 3’s content because it offered angles and extended uninterrupted scenes that are “rare in mainstream movies and TV,” allegedly giving Meta an edge in developing what CEO Mark Zuckerberg calls AI “superintelligence.”

“They have an interest in getting our content because it can give them a competitive advantage for the quality, fluidity, and humanity of the AI,” said Christian Waugh, an attorney for Strike 3.

The filing alleges Meta BitTorrented and distributed 2,396 of Strike 3’s copyrighted videos, making them accessible to minors since the BitTorrent protocol does not include age verification. The complaint further asserts that Meta used the adult videos “for distribution as currency to support its downloading of a vast array of other content necessary to train its AI models.”

The exhibits list not only Strike 3 titles but also mainstream television shows such as Yellowstone, Modern Family, The Bachelor, South Park, and Downton Abbey. They also include pornographic videos produced by others that appear to feature very young actors, with titles such as ExploitedTeens, Anal Teens, and EuroTeenErotica. In addition, the list contains files related to weapons (3D Gun Print, Gun Digest Shooter’s Guide to the AR-15) and political material (Antifa’s Radical Plan and Intellectual Property Rights in Cyberspace).

Using adult content as training data is “a public relations disaster waiting to happen,” said Matthew Sag, a professor of law specializing in artificial intelligence at Emory University. “Imagine a middle school student asks a Meta AI model for a video about pizza delivery, and before you know it, it’s porn.”

Strike 3 says it identified the alleged violations through infringement-detection systems it operates and traced activity to 47 Meta-affiliated IP addresses. The company is seeking $350 million in statutory damages.

Christopher Sgro, a Meta spokesperson, said: “We’re reviewing the complaint, but we don’t believe Strike’s claims are accurate.”

The lawsuit draws attention to Meta’s V-JEPA 2 “world model,” released in June, which the company says was trained on 1 million hours of “internet video,” a term the complaint highlights as vague. Zuckerberg has described Meta’s goal as putting “the power of superintelligence into people’s hands to direct it toward what they value in their own lives.”

According to the complaint, Meta executives deliberately approved the use of pirated material, with Zuckerberg’s sign-off. Nearly every major AI company faces similar copyright suits.

“The case being presented against Meta is perhaps the case of the century because of the sheer scope of infringement,” Waugh said, adding that the unsealed exhibits represent only “a thin slice of the pie.”

AI companies often defend themselves by claiming that their technologies are “transformative” and thus protected under fair use. Former President Donald Trump voiced support for this view in July, saying: “You can’t be expected to have a successful AI program when every single article, book, or anything else that you’ve read or studied you’re supposed to pay for.”

In June, U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that Meta did not break the law in training its AI models on the works of 13 authors in a separate case, Kadrey v. Meta. However, he clarified that the decision “stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one.”

That leaves the door open for Strike 3 to mount a stronger case. “The best version of their argument is: This is a fundamental problem because, by going to these pirate websites, you are undermining the market for access,” Sag explained.

Waugh argued that the dispute underscores a broader issue. “It doesn’t matter if it’s a four-sentence poem or adult entertainment. There is no appetite in this country for what AI companies appear to be doing, which is making money off the backs of rights holders who never gave permission for it.”

Three Ofcom regulators with clipboards spent the weekend walking the exhibition floor of an international adult industry conference in Prague, urging the 1,700 delegates to comply with the UK’s new Online Safety Act.

“Don’t lie to us,” one of the regulators told a room full of pornography site owners and employees during a lunchtime presentation on the law’s age verification requirements, introduced in July to stop children from viewing explicit content. “Be honest and open. If your measures are not good enough yet, put that on your risk assessment.”

Delegates, some drinking champagne provided by conference sponsors, pressed the regulators with questions. What if a company couldn’t afford to install age verification? How big would the fines be? Could sites avoid compliance by blocking UK traffic? And what if competitors tipped off the regulator in an attempt to sabotage rival businesses?

“We exist to help you,” another Ofcom regulator assured an audience of about 50 men and seven women. “It’s hard. There are many, many things you need to know, but we exist to help members of the adult industry with compliance.”

Seven weeks after the introduction of the Online Safety Act, Ofcom officials said they wanted to emphasize positive progress. According to the regulators, all of the top 10 and most of the top 100 adult sites had either implemented age checks or blocked UK access. Social media sites that allow explicit content, such as X and Reddit, have also deployed age assurance. In August, there were 7.5 million visits to the top five age-verification providers, up from 1 million in June.

Officials described 27 July, the day the law came into effect, as “AV Day”—a moment they hoped would decisively shut off children’s access to online pornography. But the rollout has faced complications.

In the days immediately after implementation, downloads of VPNs surged as users sought to bypass geographic restrictions and age checks.

“The rollout has been fairly disastrous,” said Mike Stabile, director of public policy at the Free Speech Coalition in the U.S. “VPNs have surged; people have not been compliant; we’re seeing traffic go to pirate sites … I don’t think Ofcom would look at this and say: ‘This is what we wanted.’”

American lawyer Corey Silverstein, who has challenged similar age-verification laws in several U.S. states, said there was hostility among delegates. “People are very professional and very polite, but this isn’t the friendliest audience. Some people steer very clear of them. You can see it must be uncomfortable for them walking into a trade show like this.”

Still, Silverstein advised adult site owners to work with regulators. “Their goal is not to cut your legs off. They smile and they’re very nice. They’re not trying to kill you,” he said. “My understanding is they’re actually not even looking to financially fine you. They just want to push you in the right direction for compliance.”

At the conference, regulators in white shirts handed out paper questionnaires to delegates as steel drums played and dancers in feathered leotards entertained the crowd. The anonymous forms asked whether companies had adopted age verification and, if not, why they had done nothing. By Saturday evening, one official admitted few delegates had filled them out but expressed hope for more participation the next day.

So far, no company has been fined under the Online Safety Act, but Ofcom has opened 12 investigations covering more than 60 pornographic sites and apps.

This has caused unease among site operators, many of whom are already contending with new regulations in the U.S. and France. Still, some acknowledged the value of Ofcom’s outreach.

“In the U.S., people really don’t want to talk to us,” said Alex Kekesi, Pornhub’s vice president of brand and community. “We appreciate that Ofcom has invited us to have a seat at the table. We’re often not included in conversations that have to do with regulating our industry.”

Ahead of the law’s introduction, Ofcom created a Porn Portfolio team of six compliance officers to encourage adherence. Members of the team, who requested anonymity for safeguarding reasons, have attended similar conferences in Berlin, Amsterdam, and Los Angeles. A separate enforcement team of more than 40 staff investigates violations.

“We are very conscious of the size of the sector and the ease with which anybody can set up a service that shares pornographic content,” one official said. “We’re not saying that we are going to manage to get every single service into compliance. The approach we take is targeting our resources on those areas where the most children are at most risk of harm.”

Penalties, when imposed, will be significant. Sites could face fines up to £18 million or 10% of global revenue.

“Companies can choose to not comply and take the risk that we will come after them and find them. We want enforcement to change that balance of incentives, so they think it’s just not worth taking the risk,” another regulator explained.

Officials also pushed back on the idea that VPN use means the law has failed, stressing that the main goal is to stop children from accidentally stumbling across pornography rather than blocking determined adults.

Beyond age verification, site operators are also wrestling with AI-generated pornographic content. Regulators warned companies to prevent the creation of violent or illegal imagery that could result in action by Ofcom or payment processors like Visa and Mastercard.

“From a compliance perspective, how can you tell the difference between a 15-year-old AI model and an 18- or 19-year-old AI model?” one delegate asked, concerned about preventing users from producing child sexual abuse material.

Steve Jones, who operates an AI porn site, explained how his team manages the issue. “We say your creation has to be at least 5ft tall, can’t be completely flat-chested and we ban things like pigtails and braces and all the childish toys and teddy bears and things like that,” he said. “AI doesn’t understand the difference between an adult woman that looks young and a young girl. We have to teach it. The AI itself has no morals and no ethics.”

The United Kingdom could soon see every adult required to carry a digital ID to work legally in the country. Prime Minister Keir Starmer proposed a plan last week that would make digital identification mandatory by 2029.

Employers would be required to check new hires against an app-based system containing personal information such as a person’s name, photo, date of birth, nationality, and residency status. This system would replace the current process of reviewing physical IDs or National Insurance numbers, the U.K.’s equivalent of a Social Security number.

“The proposals are the government’s latest bid to tackle illegal immigration, with the new ID being a form of proof of a citizen’s right to live and work in the UK,” reports Sky News. “The so-called ‘Brit card’ will be subject to a consultation and would require legislation to be passed, before being rolled out.”

Civil libertarians and privacy experts warn that such a scheme could function as a national tracking system. “Currently, when somebody presents a plastic driver’s license, that interaction is between the two parties, and the government is none the wiser,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) noted in June. “But digital driver licenses—and other sorts of digital IDs—are being built so that the system notifies the government every time an identity card is used, giving it a bird’s-eye view of where, when, and to whom people are showing their identity. That ‘phone home’ functionality becomes especially intrusive as people start having to use digital ID online, giving the government the ability to track your browsing history.”

Starmer’s proposal stops short of requiring digital IDs for all online activities. “Under the proposals, anybody starting a new job would be required to hold the digital ID, which could then be checked against a central database of those with the right to work in the UK,” Sky News reports.

Still, earlier this year, “Downing Street was exploring proposals for a digital ID card to crack down on illegal migration, rogue landlords and exploitative work,” The Guardian reported. Critics note that such a system could easily be expanded beyond employment verification.

Once in place, politicians could be tempted to use digital IDs for taxes, health records, benefits, or even access to social media and adult websites. Guardian columnist Gabby Hinsliff warned of darker possibilities:

Though Britons wouldn’t have to produce their IDs when stopped on the street under Starmer’s plan, “a future administration could easily change that. Just imagine how useful ID cards would be in rounding people up for Trump-style mass deportations—especially if that effort was linked to facial recognition technology already in use by the British police, creating a system capable of automatically scanning crowds anywhere from a rush-hour Tube station to a football match and matching faces against an immigration database.”

Hinsliff said she was horrified by such a prospect. But, she noted, “many will not be—especially if it’s sold as a tool to stop some group they do not like.”

Civil liberties advocates warn the risks are not just political but also technological. “A centralised digital ID scheme would also be a honeypot for hackers and foreign adversaries, creating huge digital security risks for our data,” said the group Big Brother Watch.

Digital ID Trends in the U.S.

While Britons debate the proposal, the U.S. has already taken steps toward its own form of digital identification. The Real ID Act is one step in this direction, and as of June, 13 states had launched digital driver’s license systems, while another 21 had passed legislation to implement or study them, according to the ACLU. New Jersey passed such a measure in August.

The ACLU has issued recommendations for building digital ID systems that protect privacy. More than 80 individuals and organizations have also signed a letter urging that digital IDs be built without “phone home” capabilities.

“We call on authorities everywhere to favor identity solutions that have no phone home capability whatsoever, and to prioritize privacy and security over interoperability and ease of implementation,” the letter states.

Whether in the U.K. or the U.S., experts warn that political climates marked by suspicion of immigrants, restrictions on speech, and expanded surveillance powers make it less likely governments will adopt the most privacy-protective versions of digital ID systems.

Pornhub’s parent company Aylo confirmed it will not restrict access to its websites in Ohio, despite a new age verification law that took effect on September 30.

Earlier this week, several media outlets incorrectly reported that Aylo planned to block users in the state. The confusion arose after reporters received the same official statement Aylo has used in the past when announcing site restrictions in states with similar legislation.

In its statement, Aylo emphasized that, as a provider of an “interactive computer service” under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it does not fall under the requirements of Section 1349.10 of the Ohio Revised Code, which mandates age verification for such services.

“We have publicly supported age verification of users for years,” the company said. “However, we believe that any law to this effect must preserve user safety and privacy while effectively protecting children from accessing adult content.”

The company stressed that while it supports efforts to safeguard minors, it will continue to advocate for legislation that balances protection with privacy and security for users.

SHERIDAN, Wyo. — Bad Orange, a creator of sensual audio stories designed for women, announced that its YouTube channel — which had close to 200,000 followers — was recently removed. In addition, the company’s bank account was closed. Bad Orange is pushing back against these moves, calling them both unfair and hypocritical.

“It is confusing, to put it politely, why we are being subjected to these arbitrary standards in this day and age,” said Larry, a classically trained actor who performs under the pseudonym Daddy Sounds.

He pointed to the broader media landscape to highlight what he views as inconsistent standards. “At a moment when the average issue of Slate contains advice letters about extreme kink and The Daily Beast runs ads for Lovehoney’s Advent calendars, which they call ‘an erotic journey of passion, play, and connection,’ complete with sex toys, it’s rather puzzling why our content is viewed as intolerable,” Larry said. “It’s as if they hate women or something.”

Larry compared Bad Orange’s situation to that of the gaming industry, where adult-oriented game creators have seen thousands of accounts shut down by payment processors, devastating their businesses.

“It’s not right. It’s hypocritical, and we’re going to take action,” he added.

Although Bad Orange managed to establish an alternative method for processing payments, the company described the transition as a time-consuming and difficult administrative process.

Sensual audio content has been gaining popularity among women seeking erotic experiences outside the realm of mainstream adult video.

“Voice content is far more intimate and engaging than video,” Larry explained. “Like radio, it stimulates the listener’s imagination and visualization abilities, which is usually vastly more interesting than anything a camera can record.”

For more details, visit the Bad Orange website.

LOS ANGELES — A federal judge has dismissed several trafficking-related claims filed against Aylo, the parent company of Pornhub, and credit card processor Visa, according to court orders issued Monday.

The case was brought by Serena Fleites, whose story was highlighted in Nicholas Kristof’s widely discussed New York Times opinion column “The Children of Pornhub.” In the piece, Kristof portrayed Fleites as emblematic of claims that the platform enabled illegal content, including child sexual abuse material. Fleites later disclosed that she had been victimized as a teenager and filed suit against Aylo and Visa.

The lawsuit is being heard by U.S. District Judge Wesley L. Hsu of the Central District of California. Fleites is represented by attorneys Michael Bowe and Lauren Tabaksblat of Brithem LLP, along with David Stein of Olson Sten LLP. Bowe, who previously defended former U.S. President Donald Trump and appeared in Netflix’s Money Shot: The Pornhub Story, co-founded Brithem LLP earlier this year as a boutique firm specializing in what it calls “impact litigation.”

Judge Hsu ruled that many of Fleites’ claims against Visa could not proceed. Her attorneys had sought to hold Visa liable for processing payments connected to Aylo’s platforms, then operating under the name MindGeek. However, Hsu dismissed most of these claims, finding insufficient evidence of active participation in trafficking-related conduct.

“Civil conspiracy with Aylo cannot be triggered solely by knowledge and inertia; it requires affirmative alignment with the venture’s unlawful purpose,” Hsu wrote. He added that there were “no allegations of internal Visa communications, decision-making, or admissions reflecting an understanding of MindGeek’s unlawful objectives,” noting instead that Visa appeared to have simply “continued a pre-existing business relationship in the face of controversy.”

While most claims against Visa were dismissed without prejudice, Hsu allowed parts of Fleites’ case against Aylo to continue. These include allegations tied to the Communications Decency Act and claims related to Aylo’s alleged role in the receipt, distribution, or transportation of exploitative material.

“While the court agrees that plaintiff’s pleadings as to MindGeek’s involvement in the videos as specific to her leave more to be desired,” Hsu wrote, “the court finds that these allegations paired with the general allegations found in the rest of the complaint … are sufficient at this stage of the litigation when all reasonable inferences are drawn in favor of the plaintiff.”

Hsu also dismissed claims that Aylo violated the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA)through direct liability, but he allowed Fleites’ beneficiary liability claim to move forward. That provision of the law allows plaintiffs to pursue damages against entities that knowingly benefited from participation in a trafficking venture.

In addition, Hsu dismissed allegations of conspiracy between Visa and Aylo to violate the TVPRA.

A spokesperson for Aylo declined to comment beyond a short statement: “Out of respect for the integrity of court proceedings, our policy is not to comment on ongoing litigation. We look forward to the facts being fully and fairly aired in that forum.”

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The state of Ohio will begin enforcing age verification regulations for adult entertainment content on September 30. In response, popular content platforms among adult content creators are either implementing age verification or withdrawing entirely from the state’s digital space in an effort to comply with the new law.

The parent company of Pornhub, Aylo, confirmed to The War on Porn that it will expand its geo-blocking protocol to cover Ohio as a protest against the state’s law, specifically targeting adult entertainment content.

A spokesperson for Aylo explained that Ohio is now the latest state with restricted access to its network of platforms, which also includes premium membership websites.

“Any regulations that require hundreds of thousands of adult sites to collect significant amounts of highly sensitive personal information are putting user safety in jeopardy,” the spokesperson said. “Moreover, as experience has demonstrated, unless properly enforced, users will simply access non-compliant sites or find other methods of evading these laws.

“The best solution to make the internet safer, preserve user privacy, and prevent children from accessing adult content is performing age verification at the source: on the device. The technology to accomplish this exists today.”

Meanwhile, Bluesky has begun implementing age verification measures on its platform for all users based in Ohio, according to TechCrunch.

“In Ohio, starting on Monday, 9/29, we’ll be implementing an age assurance solution similar to what we’re doing in South Dakota and Wyoming,” Bluesky posted.

“We recognize that promoting safety for young people is a shared responsibility, and we support the idea of collective action to protect children from online risks,” the company added. “We also recognize that governments may have strong, often conflicting, views on these issues and how to weigh competing priorities.”

The age verification mandate was attached to the appropriations bill, House Bill (HB) 96, signed into law by Gov. Mike DeWine on July 2, 2025.

DeWine stated, “This budget builds upon my commitment to make Ohio the best place for everyone to live their version of the American Dream. … It prioritizes our children, empowers our workforce, and strengthens our communities.”

The War on Porn reported on HB 96 earlier this year, when amendments allowed the addition of a rider bill for age verification.

The bill’s language requires “reasonable age verification methods” that rely on government-issued identification cards, transactional data, and other means.

The provisions were tucked into the 3,156-page omnibus spending bill funding Ohio’s government for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Companies in the adult entertainment industry, through the vendors they must contract, will be required to verify the same users every two years thereafter.