The penalty has been added to the British governments Online Safety Bill.
The revisions also mandate the removal ofvideos depicting illegal immigration in a positive light.
The changes follow pressure from politicians in the ruling Conservative party.
It’s free, every week, in your inbox.
Child safety groupswelcomed the moveto make executives criminally liable, but critics have raised an array of concerns.
A patchwork of complaints
The diversity of the dissent is striking.
Wikimediawarnedthe penalties will affect not only big tech corporations, but also volunteer-led content moderation and public interest websites.
The non-profit also notes that mandatory age verification can institute extra data collection, which puts userprivacyat risk.
Libertarians haveadded concernsabout the economic ramifications.
They contend that threats of jail and heavy fines will stifle innovation and discouragestartupsfrom operating in the UK.
The natural reponse will be to block users.
He argues that the rules will raise greater barriers to entry for their smaller competitors.
This was the response of thousands of US sites in response to GDPR.
Free speech campaigners, meanwhile,fear platformswill be pushed to aggressively block content and deploy automated monitoring systems.
That could be quite subjective.
Further qualms have arisen over the Bills ambiguities.
Legal experts are wary that the rules will be open to different interpretations.
The capacity to exploit the rules has raised considerable alarm.
Law professorshave accusedthe government of using child safety as a smokescreen for censorship and control.
Techethicistswarnthe Bill could politicize online harm a theory thats intensified over the migration proposal.
Websites could be demoted in listings if they have content deemed illegal, the organization said ina tweet.
This could severely impact groups acting on refugee and migrant rights.
Censorship of images of small boat crossings extends to search engines.
Websites could be demoted in listings if they have content deemed illegal.
But the broad reach, punitive measures, and subjectivity of the proposals risk creating more problems than theysolves.
Story byThomas Macaulay
Thomas is the managing editor of TNW.
He leads our coverage of European tech and oversees our talented team of writers.
Away from work, he e(show all)Thomas is the managing editor of TNW.
He leads our coverage of European tech and oversees our talented team of writers.
Away from work, he enjoys playing chess (badly) and the guitar (even worse).
