The War on Porn Regular Updates about the Assault on The Adult Industry
Related Articles
The age verification era has already arrived. Across the United States, Europe and other regions, governments are moving from debate to enforcement. New rules are active in several U.S. states and throughout countries such as the U.K. and France, while regulators and payment processors now expect full compliance. For adult platforms, the message is clear: meet the requirements or risk losing access to financial partners and audiences.
In the United Kingdom, the media regulator Ofcom has taken the lead on enforcement under the Online Safety Act, where the deadline for installing “robust age checks” has already passed.
“We’re seeing more and more services comply every day,” says an Ofcom spokesperson. “We will continue to work constructively with providers who are trying to comply to protect U.K. users. But services that do not comply can expect enforcement action.”
Because every jurisdiction defines its own rules and terminology — “effective age assurance,” for example — businesses often face confusing and inconsistent expectations. Large companies can dedicate compliance teams and budgets to meet those standards, but smaller sites and independent creators are left struggling to interpret vague mandates with limited resources.
Yet compliance doesn’t necessarily mean closing a business or draining finances. With the right approach, platforms can stay lawful, protect their income, and continue operating safely within this new regulatory landscape.
When Small Operators Face Big Rules
Free Speech Coalition board member Megan Stokes stresses that many underestimate how broadly these laws are written.
“One common misconception is that these laws only apply to the ‘big players,’” she notes. “In reality, the language is so broad that even an independent creator with a small personal site could be at risk. At FSC, we work with independent performers who run small branded sites alongside their fan platforms; if those sites aren’t using compliant verification, they could personally get pulled into a lawsuit.”
Jonathan Corona, COO of MobiusPay, echoes that view from a financial compliance perspective.
“AV mandates are applied to everyone equally,” he reports. “It doesn’t matter what size your business is.”
According to Stokes, the outcome is a growing divide between those who can afford compliance infrastructure and those who cannot.
“The wave of state-level AV laws has really created a two-tier system,” she explains. “Larger companies have the budget and legal teams to adapt quickly, whether that means paying for enterprise verification vendors or building complex compliance systems. Smaller operators don’t have those resources, so even the threat of one lawsuit can be absolutely devastating.
“For example, we see both independent creators and boutique studios who operate their own sites struggling to even understand what ‘reasonable’ compliance looks like in practice,” she continues. “On the other hand, the larger platforms they compete with simply hand the problem to a vendor.
“This goes far beyond just compliance,” Stokes adds. “At the end of the day, it’s more about who can even afford to stay in the marketplace. Big companies can adapt. For smaller operators, one lawsuit could completely shut doors. Unfortunately, these laws risk turning compliance into a privilege of size.”
Industry attorney Corey Silverstein argues that this imbalance is not coincidental.
“Sadly, all of these governments knew that these age verification laws would immediately put smaller operators out of business, because that is exactly what they were aiming to accomplish,” Silverstein says. “Lawmakers can continue to claim that AV is about protecting children, but I’m not buying that. These laws were meant to control free speech and sadly, that is exactly what is happening.”
Legal Hazards and Unclear Boundaries
For many website owners, the biggest concern isn’t the concept of age verification itself — it’s the legal uncertainty surrounding it. The wording of these mandates can be vague, making it easy to misinterpret obligations or underestimate enforcement risk.
“It is a mistake to think that simple age gates or geoblocking solve the problem,” says Stokes. “They don’t. VPNs make location checks unreliable and some states set very strict standards for what counts as ‘reasonable’ verification. If operators assume the old tools are good enough, they’re leaving themselves exposed to lawsuits.”
Mike Stabile, Director of Public Policy at the Free Speech Coalition, agrees that confusion is widespread.
“What counts as compliance is often vague and contradictory, and even companies with in-house compliance teams struggle to make sense of these laws,” he says.
Attorney Larry Walters warns that ignoring or mishandling AV rules carries significant risk.
“The most significant legal risk for smaller website operators and creators is the potential for being targeted by either a civil claimant or government agency,” Walters explains.
While most lawsuits have so far targeted major platforms, some smaller sites have already been named.
“Smaller operators are, in some ways, at greater risk since they may have fewer resources to defend a claim or pay a large monetary judgment,” he observes.
With little legal precedent, Walters adds, it’s uncertain whether liability could fall on both corporate entities and individual owners — or whether such judgments could even be discharged through bankruptcy.
Silverstein agrees that every operator must take compliance seriously.
“There is no room for anyone to misinterpret or ignore AV regulations,” he warns. “Additionally, some people are making the mistake of thinking that all of the AV laws are the same — they are not. Each state and country’s AV laws have many nuances that make them distinct from one another.”
Both attorneys emphasize that complexity and cost are not legal defenses. Operators must audit traffic patterns, document compliance measures and seek legal advice.
“All operators need to be conducting substantive traffic audits and consulting with an attorney to discuss how they may specifically be at risk,” Silverstein cautions.
Stabile adds that help is available.
“If you’re panicking, the FSC is here a resource,” he says. “We keep a running list of what laws are in effect and coming into effect in our Action Center, and we provide links to the legislation to help you understand the specifics of the law. That’s available for everyone in the industry, whether you’re an FSC member or not.”
The Coalition’s “AV Tool Kit” is designed to simplify this process.
“The tool kit is meant to be a practical guide, not just a policy overview,” explains Stokes. “Webmasters can use it to see, state by state, where their biggest risks are and what methods are recognized. Think of it as both a map and a checklist; it helps you see your risks clearly and adjust as the laws evolve. The key is to treat it as a living resource and check back regularly, since the laws are changing so quickly.”
Walters emphasizes that the laws demand full adherence:
“None of these state AV laws has a ‘good faith’ defense built in. Actual compliance is expected. Some laws contain prior notification requirements and an opportunity to cure before a claim can be asserted, but these are the exception to the rule.”
Silverstein is even more direct.
“Government agencies and private plaintiffs don’t care how hard someone tries to be in compliance with AV laws,” he says. “They will always take the position that anything short of 100% compliance is not compliance. Thus, webmasters should be documenting the agreements that they are entering into with third-party AV providers — and ensuring that they have thoroughly reviewed the AV provider and its product before signing up.”
Walters advises keeping detailed records on when AV tools were implemented, where they apply and how user data is handled.
“Any data that it is illegal to retain under these AV laws should be immediately and permanently deleted,” he warns.
Silverstein reinforces the importance of data protection.
“Securing, encrypting and limiting data access are key steps,” he says. “But far too many small sites are using inadequate practices to store sensitive data. A few key recommendations are: 1) Do not collect any data that you don’t absolutely need, 2) Do not keep data any longer than is necessary, 3) Data security is your responsibility, so you need to understand all of your data handling systems regardless of whether it’s done by a human being or some type of automated process.”
Payment Processing and Compliance
Even the most compliant website can’t function without payment processing. Credit card acquirers and banks now require proof that sites meet regional age verification rules before approving or maintaining accounts.
“Both Visa and Mastercard require compliance with jurisdictional age verification laws,” explains Cathy Beardsley, CEO of Segpay and FSC board member. “All new programs and any new URL submitted to a bank for approval will require compliance with age verification. The banks will be checking to make sure your site is compliant.”
Corona offers an example of how geography can complicate things.
“For example, if a company is based in a state that does not have an AV law on the books, but the customer is accessing the website from a state that does have one, then the company would need to either comply with the law or block access to their site from that state,” he notes.
Both Beardsley and Corona recommend formal written policies for handling compliance, which can reassure banks and card brands.
“Having a clear policy and procedure for how the company addresses AV requirements is the first step,” says Corona. “Regardless of whether the company is integrating to a third-party service to maintain compliance or blocking states that require age verification, having a solid P&P to show the processing patterns, sponsor banks and card brands will go a long way in demonstrating responsible operations.”
Beardsley suggests another practical workaround.
“Offering safe-for-work tours and then adding age verification after checkout is a good way to ensure the sale and not waste funds on an AV check if the consumer fails to follow through with the checkout process or if the transaction is declined.”
She adds that businesses can include verification costs in subscription pricing or turn to open-source tools to minimize expense.
Noncompliance, however, can be catastrophic.
Sites flagged for violations may lose payment processing immediately until problems are resolved.
“The company could face a simple reprimand and be tasked with remediation, such as implementing an AV service or demonstrating that the site is blocked from the specific jurisdictions that require AV,” Corona says. “On the extreme end, however, the company can face termination.”
Both executives underscore that proactive communication is key.
“We take a hands-on approach when advising our clients and ensure that they are complying with card brand regulations before putting the application forward for concurrence,” Corona explains.
The takeaway is simple: staying compliant with AV laws isn’t just a legal requirement — it’s critical for maintaining payment relationships.
Technology Providers and Practical Solutions
A growing ecosystem of technology vendors now offers tools to make age verification possible for sites of any size. Companies like VerifyMy, Incode, and are developing privacy-preserving systems tailored to international standards.
“One of the biggest challenges for webmasters is keeping up with the rapidly evolving regulatory landscape,” notes Andy Lulham, COO of VerifyMy. “New age verification laws are being introduced at pace and requirements often vary from country to country and even state to state.”
He adds that usability can make or break a compliance program.
“Age verification isn’t one-size-fits-all,” he says. “What works for one site or audience may not work for another. If the process is cumbersome or invasive, it can frustrate users, increase drop-off rates and directly impact revenue.”
Milo Flores from Incode says their framework revolves around three pillars: data minimization, encryption, and automatic data deletion.
“Systems that return only an ‘over 18’ result without exposing identity details show users that platforms aren’t collecting or keeping unnecessary personal data,” he explains.
Flores and other developers point to reusable credentials — where users store age tokens or ID wallets — as an accessible option for smaller sites.
“For users, they deliver more privacy and control,” says Flores. “Credentials can be stored in a secure wallet and shared only when the user chooses. Passkeys can be safely kept on the user’s device, making it easy to prove they’ve already completed an age check without exposing new data.”
Yoti’s representative agrees that reusable solutions lower friction for both users and site owners.
“Users will increasingly need to prove their age for sites in a number of sectors, including adult content, gaming, social media and dating,” the rep says. “The lower friction decreases cost for smaller operators. Plus, reusable tools allow small businesses to compete with larger platforms on trust and compliance — without having to become identity experts themselves.
“In the first months of the U.K. Online Safety Act, 25% of users on adult content sites are choosing to prove their age with a reusable age assurance option, including with reusable ID wallets or by setting up an age token,” the rep adds.
Flores advocates an adaptive “waterfall” model that starts with the least intrusive method and escalates only when necessary.
“This adaptive model means webmasters don’t have to juggle multiple vendors or build complex workflows themselves,” he says.
Looking Ahead: Control, Privacy and Consequences
While AV vendors highlight innovation, critics warn that the broader implications extend far beyond compliance.
“The answer to where AV technology is headed is nuanced, depending upon what you see as its true intention: protecting children or punishing adults,” says digital media analyst Stephen Yagielowicz.
Leaning toward the latter view, he calls AV “not a problem to be solved, but a process to be managed.”
“Not to detract from the very real need to safeguard the innocence of youth, but I suspect more sinister motives are behind the recent regulatory maneuvering,” he contends. “The elimination of personal privacy is the ultimate goal of these initiatives. This is why partisans and regulators so oppose device-level blocking, since anyone could ‘borrow’ a device or otherwise gain access to it — including consenting adults whose identity would then be masked.
“Age verification ‘to protect the children’ is merely the sugar coating intended to make the demise of online privacy more palatable,” Yagielowicz adds.
Despite those concerns, Yagielowicz acknowledges potential technological benefits ahead.
“Improved biometrics could be a positive development in terms of accuracy and verification speed, but the data security implications are profound,” he warns. “This is where blockchain technology can play a role by decentralizing and securing identity information from casual perusal, even if that data is available to governments. Technology is not a silver bullet against the challenges of adequate age assurance, but it will broaden the availability of tools and other resources and this can ease compliance.
“The winning pattern is data-minimizing, auditable and swappable across jurisdictions — aligned to how U.K./EU regulators describe ‘effective’ age assurance and transparency,” he concludes. “It won’t be easy, but it will be necessary.”
The Takeaway
“Necessary” may be the single most accurate word to describe this new landscape. Age verification has become standard policy in multiple regions, with regulators, financial networks and courts all enforcing compliance.
But while the challenges are significant, smaller platforms and independent creators are not powerless. Through careful documentation, use of verified vendors, and reliance on evolving privacy-protective technologies, they can continue to operate safely and sustainably in a fast-changing regulatory world.
