The proposed Digital Duty of Care legislation mandates that internet companies proactively mitigate user harms or incur penalties reaching A$109 million. In response to industry pushback, the eSafety Commissioner suggested lawmakers could refine content harm definitions while attributing overzealous removals to automated moderation rather than the bill itself. The reform package also grants internet users the option to disable algorithmic feeds to see only accounts they follow. Having passed the lower house, the measure now depends on Senate crossbench support to become law before the end of the year.
Key points
Australia's internet regulator argued that platform profit models favor maximizing user e…: Australia's internet regulator argued that platform profit models favor maximizing user engagement rather than over-censoring content.
Regulators indicated openness to narrowing the statutory definitions of harm to alleviate…: Regulators indicated openness to narrowing the statutory definitions of harm to alleviate tech sector compliance concerns.
The government requires crossbench support in the Senate to pass the bill before the end…: The government requires crossbench support in the Senate to pass the bill before the end of the year.
Sources checked by our analysis pipeline: 1
SYDNEY, Nov 10 : Australia's internet regulator on Tuesday rejected warnings from tech giants that a proposed online safety law would trigger widespread censorship by platforms anxious to avoid liability, arguing that their business models incentivised them to maximise user engagement.
The government's Digital Duty of Care legislation will force internet companies to proactively check and stop potential user harms or face fines of up to A$109 million ($75 million).
Industry critics and free speech advocates say it gives regulators too much say on what content is harmful, while supporters say only a wide-ranging law can ensure an effective safety framework.
The legislation has passed the House of Representatives, but needs crossbench support to clear the Senate and become law.
"I haven't seen any indication, particularly over the past two years, that companies are over-censoring," eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant told a Senate inquiry, when asked about warnings the law would have a chilling effect on free speech.
"Companies today are trying to show the maximum amount of material, no matter how harmful or hurtful it is to the Australian…
Federal authorities have launched a national security probe into claims that businesswoman Alice Huang passed sensitive data to Beijing while collaborating with Nvidia on Asian infrastructure projects. The scrutiny intensified after company chief executive Jensen Huang acknowledged a personal affair with her, though he denied knowing of any espionage links. Nvidia's board is currently reviewing whether its leadership was intentionally targeted by foreign operatives, even as Beijing rejects the allegations.
The cloud computing firm has drawn intense international scrutiny following American inquiries into whether it helped divert restricted artificial intelligence semiconductors to Beijing. Suspicions expanded amid a U.S. probe into Nvidia chief Jensen Huang's personal ties with former managing director Alice Huang, an alleged Chinese intelligence operative. The regulatory crosshairs threaten the company as domestic and foreign authorities examine potential export control and legal breaches.
Fresh scrutiny over illicit supply chains has emerged after Jensen Huang acknowledged an affair with an executive tied to a suspected chip-smuggling firm. Chinese businesses continue to tap into banned computing power through regulatory loopholes in Southeast Asian cloud networks as well as unauthorized physical deliveries. The ongoing pressure accelerates Beijing's push to finance domestic semiconductor alternatives that could eventually challenge American technological dominance.