国产诱惑福利

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant on Tuesday released her first compliance report since those laws took effect demanding 10 platforms remove all Australian account-holders younger than 16.

While 5 million Australian accounts had been deactivated, a substantial number of Australian children continued to retain accounts, create new accounts and pass platforms鈥� age assurance systems, the report said.

Inman Grant said in a statement her office had 鈥渟ignificant concerns about the compliance鈥� of half of those 10 platforms. Her office was gathering evidence against the five that they had not taken 鈥渞easonable steps鈥� to prevent young children holding accounts.

Courts could order fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to comply. eSafety would decide on whether to initiate court action against any platform by midyear.

that aren鈥檛 under investigation are Reddit, X, Kick, Threads and Twitch.

Communications Minister Anika Wells said the five criticized platforms were deliberately not complying with Australian law.

鈥淪ocial media platforms are choosing to do the absolute bare minimum because they want these laws to fail,鈥� Wells told reporters.

鈥淭his is the world-leading law. We鈥檙e the first in the world to do it. Of course they don鈥檛 want these laws to work because they want that to be a chilling effect on the dozen countries that have come out since Dec. 10 to follow Australia鈥檚 step,鈥� she added.

eSafety had identified 鈥減oor practices鈥� such as platforms allowing unlimited attempts for a user to pass their age assurance methods and prompting the user to try to pass the age assurance method even after they declared themselves underage.

Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, told The Associated Press it was committed to complying with Australia鈥檚 social media ban. 鈥淲e鈥檝e also been clear that accurately determining age online is a challenge for the whole industry,鈥� the statement said.

Snap Inc. said it has locked 450,000 accounts in compliance with the law and continued to lock more every day.

鈥淪napchat remains fully committed to implementing reasonable steps under the legislation and supporting its underlying goal of improving online safety for young Australians,鈥� a Snap statement said.

TikTok declined to comment on Tuesday and Alphabet Inc., which owns YouTube and Google, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Lisa Given, an information sciences expert at RMIT University in Melbourne, said she expected the courts will decide whether platforms have taken 鈥渞easonable steps鈥� to exclude young children.

鈥淚f a tech company has said: look, we put in age assurance, we鈥檝e done all these steps. That鈥檚 reasonable. Even though the aged assurance technologies are flawed, whose fault is that? Should they be held accountable for a piece of technology that is not 100% and likely not going to be 100% foolproof any time soon?鈥� Given said.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 really the crux of it: what the courts will deem reasonable,鈥� she added.

has filed one of two constitutional challenges to the social media ban in the Australian High Court. The other was filed by , a Sydney-based rights group that did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday..

Both suits claim the law is unconstitutional because it infringes on Australia鈥檚 implied freedom of political communication.

A prelimary hearing is set for May 21 when the court will set a date for oral arguments, Reddit said Tuesday.

Global online forum Reddit on Friday filed a court challenge to that bans Australian children younger than 16 from holding accounts on the world鈥檚 most popular social media platforms.

California-based Reddit Inc.鈥檚 suit filed in the High Court follows a case filed last month by Sydney-based rights group .

Both suits claim the law is unconstitutional because it infringes on Australia鈥檚 implied freedom of political communication.