Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'

The British Government has released plans for a comprehensive overhaul of how tech companies monitor user content – which could have global consequences. Here’s what users can expect.

Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'
Category
Insight | Tech
Insight
|
Tech
Published Date
21
March 2022
Reading Time

The British Government has released plans for a comprehensive overhaul of how tech companies monitor user content. In an effort to combat a rise in digital crime and the spread of harmful content, the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport released a draft Online Safety Bill in the middle of 2021. Since its release the Bill has undergone a radical redrafting in the hope that Britain can become the “safest place in the world to go online”.  

While the Bill will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and likely amendment, the key aspects of the current draft of the Bill are:

Tech companies will have a duty of care to protect users from harmful content by:

  • preventing illegal content and activity online (like terrorism and fraud);
  • ensuring children are not exposed to inappropriate content; and
  • for ‘Category 1’ companies only (such as Twitter and Facebook), monitoring and removing legal but harmful content. These companies will be required to set out in their terms of services how such content will be dealt with. The Government has also signalled that it will provide additional guidance on this via additional legislation.

There is support for increased responsibilities, but the idea that harmful content that is otherwise legal must be removed has been met with significant concern. The Government has tried to counter this concern by introducing a right of appeal for users who feel their content has been removed unfairly.

The legislation will create three new specific online offences. These offences are:

  • Banning the posting or sending of a threatening message that expresses a threat of serious harm. This is intended to better capture online threats to kill or cause serious harm and will carry a sentence of up to five years imprisonment.
  • Making it illegal to send a communication that is intended to cause psychological harm. This offence will carry a prison sentence of up to two years and is aimed at criminalising social media “pile-on’s” (where online hate is directed at an individual).
  • Preventing the deliberate sending of false messages that have the intention of causing harm (such as bomb hoaxes). This will carry a prison sentence of up to 51 weeks.

Online platform providers will be expected to do more to protect users from fraudulent adverts and scams. Some providers will also be required to carry out age checks on restricted content – this fulfils a long time British Government commitment to restrict the viewing of certain content.

It is intended that Ofcom, Britain’s communications regulator, will be responsible for policing the regulatory requirements and will have the power to fine a breaching technology company up to 10% of the offending company’s global turnover. Ofcom will also have the ability to prosecute company executives where they fail to comply with regulatory requests. If liable, executives could face a penalty of up to two years imprisonment.

The proposals have received criticism in Britain, with one Government MP labelling it a “censor’s charter”. However, the Bill is yet another recent example of global attempts to impose new regulations on technology companies. Late last year, the Australian Government announced its intention to introduce legislation that would force social media companies operating in Australia to collect the personal details of all users. Companies would also be required to have an established complaints process where users can ask for content to be taken down if they consider it defamatory – if a post is not removed, then the social media company can be compelled by court order to reveal a user’s identity. More recently the US President, Joe Biden, has urged Congress to introduce legislation that would strengthen privacy protections and prohibit companies from collecting children’s personal information.

We have not seen any similar proposed regulatory changes in New Zealand, but we would expect that as other like-minded countries impose restrictions, we will see similar actions taken here. We will keep you updated on any developments.

Services in this insight

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.

Services in this insight

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.

Services in this insight

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore.

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.
Previous Article
Next Article

Modern slavery regulation on the way – Is your business ready?

From Hertzian waves to hyperlinks – What the BSA’s online decision means for your business

Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground

Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand

The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships

New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code

IPP3A is nearly in force – What agencies need to know

OPC shifts public enquiries online – What agencies should do now

AI as a confidante? Legal privilege and the ever-increasing use of AI

New Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code – What you need to know

Building blocks of trade mark law: New Zealand approach to "use as a trade mark" now compatible with Australia

Consumer law update 2025

Open banking launches in New Zealand

Is fair something to fear? The Government announces beefed-up Fair Trading Act

Is it fair? Lessons from Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta

Open banking almost live

Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act

Product labelling changes flagged for New Zealand

Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 introduced to New Zealand

Open banking regulations released for consultation

Ten tips for buy-side M&A success

A recipe for disaster – Is caramel a copyright work?

Becoming a Globally Renowned Fintech Nation (and how regulation can light the path)

Important changes made to the Privacy Act

New Zealand may ban social media for young users

Customer and Product Data Act update – Open banking officially on the way

Tips from the trenches – Your AI policy cheat sheet

Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media

Security guidance released for emerging tech companies

Customer and Product Data Bill – Select Committee reports back

Consumer law update 2024

New Zealand’s Artist Resale Royalty is ready to go

The shape of coffee – “Moccona” vs “Vittoria”

New Zealand’s Copyright Act gets a sense of humour

WIPO’s traditional knowledge treaty is adopted

Doing business in the Middle East

AI and advertising – What producers need to know

Seven contract clauses every freelancer needs

Baby Reindeer – When truth is stranger than fiction?

Our comments on the Biometric Processing Privacy Code

Therapeutic Products Act to be repealed this year

Is End-to-End to end?

Geographical indications – Changes uncorked by the EU-NZ Fair Trade Agreement

Lawyers and Generative AI – New NZ Law Society guidance released

Facing the future – A biometrics code of practice for New Zealand?

Deepfakes and style mimicking – Should New Zealand adopt a right of publicity?

Five Eyes release the Five Principles to Secure Innovation

The copyright conundrum with generative AI

Innovate at the speed of trust – Privacy Commissioner releases new guidance on artificial intelligence tools

Political advertising on social media: sludge or copyright quagmire?

Privacy Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament

New Data Privacy Framework: Meta gets a lifeline

The long and winding road to royalties

Implications of the Supreme Court’s “new debt” approach in Mainzeal

EU gets closer to AI laws

UK Supreme Court puts Quincecare ‘duty’ back in its box

A Deep Dive into The Customer and Product Data Bill

Searching for a shield: Meta’s €1.2 billion fine and international transfers in the age of Big Data

New NZ-UK Free Trade Agreement signals tech, media and IP law changes

Ditch the fax! Tips for building a tech-savvy law firm

The Incorporated Societies Act 2022 – what you need to know for your society

Common myths about copyright online

Artificial artist, or artificial plagiarist?

Big boost to gaming

Is your product “AI powered”?

The latest on New Zealand’s Consumer Data Right

Space Law in New Zealand

You Cannot Defame the Dead or Can You? Tikanga Māori and NZ Defamation Law

Open Banking is coming – through the Consumer Data Right

Massive SEC Fines for Companies Using Text and Instant Messaging

One Act to Rule Them All

A Legal Guide to Kicking SaaS

Potential changes to the Privacy Act 2020

NZ's Social Media "Code of Practice" Launched

Are you being unfair?

A new Companies Office levy is one step closer

Has Paramount Pictures gone maverick?

From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners

Retail Payment System Act 2022 now in force

Paying the price for getting privacy wrong

Can AI be an inventor?

Finfluencer Crackdown

TIN Fintech Insights Report Launch

Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'

Disclosure of personal information - how to, not don't do

The Spice May Flow, But The Copyright Doesn’t

Sound Recording Ownership (Taylor's Version)

The Lowdown (and Lockdown) on Summer Clerkships

Building Blocks of Trust

Firm News | Legal Rankings

Buy Now, Regulate Soon

Ten simple things

Funding the Future

Cyber Security for Start-ups

Fit for purchase

The Screen Industry Workers Bill

UK/New Zealand Trade Deal Takes Flight

Other articles you
might like

The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships
2
April 2026

Negotiating a fintech partnership agreement is not a zero sum game.

Andrew Dentice

Partner

New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
1
April 2026

New rule 3A means individuals must be notified about indirect collection under the Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025.

Kyra Vince

Special Counsel – Knowledge

Anchali Anandanayagam

Partner

Open banking launches in New Zealand
2
December 2025

The official commencement of open banking in New Zealand is a significant milestone for the local industry.

Andrew Dentice

Partner

Kyra Vince

Special Counsel – Knowledge