EU KIDS Act (proposed Regulation on the protection of minors online)

Not to be confused with the U.S. Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (H.R. 7757), which shares the short name.

The EU KIDS Act ("EU Keeping Internet Digital Spaces Accountable and Trustworthy") is a proposed Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of minors online, adopted by the European Commission on 17 September 2026. It would set common age rules for social media and video-sharing services across the Union and impose safety-by-design obligations on the services children use most, including online games, app stores, AI companions and general conversational chatbots (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu; digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). The Commission describes the act as built on four pillars: a social media delay, safety-by-design principles, age assurance and parental responsibility, and strong enforcement (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). The proposal runs to 43 articles, 76 recitals, an explanatory memorandum and a legislative financial and digital statement (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Status and timeline

The proposal follows the recommendations of a special panel of experts on child safety online that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced in her 2025 State of the Union address; the panel's co-chairs presented their recommendations in July 2026. The explanatory memorandum also cites the Jutland Declaration of October 2025, signed by 25 Member States, European Council conclusions of October 2025 and March 2026, and a European Parliament report of November 2025 that called for a harmonised digital age limit of 16 for social media, video-sharing platforms and AI companions absent parental authorisation, and of 13 below which no minor could access social media (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The panel's process ran through the first half of 2026 and involved more than 60 experts; its co-chairs recommended an EU-wide access restriction, harmonised safety-by-design rules and privacy-preserving age assurance extending beyond social media to app stores, AI companions and some video games (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The explanatory memorandum presents the proposal as a response to diverging national laws. Italy, France, Norway, Greece, Austria, Poland and Belgium notified draft legislation restricting minors' access to certain services in 2025 and 2026, and drafts or consultations were under way in almost all other Member States, with age limits ranging from 13 to 16 and differing definitions of the services covered. It also cites a Eurobarometer survey of more than 26,000 people aged 13 to 18 and more than 12,000 parents, conducted between March and April 2026, in which nine in ten adolescents reported encountering at least one harmful or distressing piece of content online in the previous three months and 54% of parents and 45% of adolescents considered age delays an effective solution (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The Commission published the proposal and a staff working document analysing impacts on 17 September 2026 (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary), together with an accompanying Communication ("An EU approach to online child safety") (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). As drafted, the Regulation would enter into force twenty days after publication in the Official Journal and apply six months later, with the compliance-plan obligation in Article 5 applying from entry into force and Articles 33 and 35 twelve months after it; these dates are bracketed placeholders in the proposal (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). Other deadlines are keyed to those dates:

The financial statement annexed to the proposal describes a different sequence, placing parental accounts, the AI companion and chatbot rules and readiness for the expedited procedure twelve months after entry into application; the table follows the articles of the draft Regulation itself (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Scope and definitions

The proposal applies to providers of online social networking services, video-sharing platform services, software application stores, online games, operating systems, AI companions and general conversational chatbots accessible to minors, and to the AI systems among them wherever the provider is established if they are placed on the market or put into service in the Union; the non-AI services are covered wherever the provider is established if offered to recipients in the Union. It exempts not-for-profit online encyclopaedias and educational or scientific repositories, services primarily for education run by or for educational establishments, open-source software development platforms (unless the platform is itself an AI system in scope of the proposal or of the AI Act), services solely for scientific research, and services built by and for public authorities; the Commission may amend the exemptions by delegated act. Small and micro enterprises are not exempted. It specifies and complements the Digital Services Act and complements the AI Act (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

An AI companion is defined as "an AI system, including a general-purpose AI system, that provides sustained, personalised interaction or companionship which simulates or facilitates a social, emotional or interpersonal relationship with a user." A general conversational chatbot is a general-purpose AI system with general conversational functionality capable of assisting across multiple domains and tasks; the definition excludes systems limited to a specialised service, such as customer-service, business-operation, technical-support, transactional, educational, information-retrieval, industrial or manufacturing applications (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Other definitions set the terms of the age rules. A minor is anyone under 18, and a guardian anyone holding parental responsibility under national law. Online games covers both video games and video gaming platforms; games available only on physical media with no online component are outside the definition. Age assurance covers methods to determine, estimate or verify age and expressly excludes self-declaration, while age verification means establishing an age threshold "with a high degree of certainty" from identification documents or other reliable verified sources. The definitions of social networking services, video-sharing platform services, app stores and operating systems are taken from the Digital Markets Act (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Key provisions

Age rules

The Commission describes the age rules as "a staircase that follows how children grow up" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu):

• Under 13: no social media account. On video platforms designed specifically for young children, a guardian may allow limited access through the guardian's own account, with no account for the child, personalised feeds and search off, and a guardian-set daily limit of up to one hour.
• 13 and 14: a guardian may set up a limited account, with parental tools always on, a daily time limit of at most one hour, and parental approval of contacts.
• 15 and over: young people may open their own accounts on services that must be safe for them by law.

In the legal text, the under-15 bar in Article 6 applies to social networking and video-sharing services that pose a risk to minors, defined by listed features, any one of which suffices: real-time transmission of content to an indeterminate number of recipients, including live streaming; contact with users outside a minor's existing connections; recommender systems based on profiling; suggestion of contacts or content not provided by existing connections; and features designed for uninterrupted consumption, engagement incentives or re-engagement notifications. The bar covers creating an account and using the service through an account created for or attributed to the minor; recital 21 explains that the risky features are typically offered only through accounts. In the text as captured these conditions are lettered (d) to (h), with no points (a) to (c). The Commission may add equivalent features by delegated act. For the 13-to-14 accounts, guardians must be able to set a daily limit that "shall not exceed one hour per day," pre-approve new contacts and cap the number of contacts, and the guardian tools must always be active (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). Offering such accounts is optional for providers; recital 22 describes the account as that of the holder of parental responsibility, not of the minor, and makes the derogation unavailable where a provider's own terms set a minimum age above 13 (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The under-13 route in Article 7 is limited to video-sharing platforms specifically designed for children under 13 whose terms expressly permit it. The provider must publish an assessment of the service's impact on the permitted age range and its criteria for content withheld as not age-appropriate; personalisation, recommender systems and search of other users' content stay off unless that assessment shows activation is in the child's best interests. The guardian declares the child's age, access may not be enabled below age 3, the guardian-set daily duration may not exceed one hour, and access ends at 13. Nothing obliges a provider to admit under-13s (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Within six months of the rules applying, platforms must establish whether existing account holders are under 15 and disable accounts of those who are or whose age cannot be established. Self-declared age is not sufficient: access is gated by certified age verification, provided independently of the platforms through a free EU age verification app and, later, the European Digital Identity Wallet, using zero-knowledge-proof technology. Each Member State must offer at least one free means of proving age, including for people without a digital ID (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). In the text, the existing-account check falls due six months after the Regulation's entry into application, and providers need not re-verify a holder they can establish "with a high degree of confidence" has reached 15; very large platforms must file a plan explaining how they will meet the requirement and rely on that exception (Articles 6(4) and 32). The text sets no sequence between the verification app and the wallet: compliant European Digital Identity Wallets are deemed certified alongside other certified EU age verification solutions (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). See Age Verification.

Age assurance and parental responsibility

For the minimum age, Article 29 requires providers to rely "exclusively" on an EU age verification solution using an EU proof of age attestation, supplied by a third party, certified by a public authority as conforming to the EU Age Verification Scheme and listed on EU lists the Commission maintains. For the safety-by-design duties and for app stores, providers may instead use other age-assurance methods that meet the general principles of Article 27: a high level of accuracy, reliability, security, robustness, non-intrusiveness, privacy and data protection, and non-discrimination. Article 28 bars age assurance from identifying, locating, tracking, targeting, advertising to or profiling users, limits data to what is strictly necessary, requires that "any age assurance measure shall be zero knowledge proof," and allows an age signal to be stored at account level only to avoid repeat checks. Users must have a free complaint route against an incorrect age result, and operating-system providers holding a compliant age signal must share it with in-scope services on the user's consent (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Member States must make at least one certified EU age verification solution available free of charge, ensure the availability of means of obtaining a proof-of-age attestation, accredit certifying authorities, and recognise solutions listed by other Member States (Article 31). They must also provide at least one free, privacy-preserving electronic means for guardians to prove parental responsibility, accessible to people with disabilities and to refugee and displaced families. Providers may establish parental responsibility from official databases, from signals they already hold, or, at least until a delegated act specifies signals, from self-declaration backed by reasonable verification efforts (Article 26) (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Safety-by-design obligations

Article 8 requires providers of social networks, video-sharing platforms, online games, AI companions, general conversational chatbots and app stores to design their services to the proposal's safety requirements by default, including for users without an account, and to derogate from them only once age assurance has established that the user is an adult (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The proposal prohibits designing social networking and video-sharing services to encourage compulsive or excessive use by minors and deems four features to do so: automatic play and uninterrupted consumption without effective interruption; notifications not triggered by the minor's own activity; incentives or rewards for sharing content or streaming to mass audiences; and penalties or lost benefits for failing to engage at regular intervals. Services must provide time limits and usage breaks designed to protect school time and core sleep hours (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary); recital 27 defines core sleep hours as at least eight consecutive hours between 22:00 and 08:00 local time. Recommender systems for minors must be optimised for safety, quality and mental health rather than engagement, with tracking-based personalisation off by default. Nobody may message a child without pre-approval; minors do not appear in contact suggestions, their content is visible only to accepted contacts, and they cannot livestream by default. App stores must age-rate every app under a published methodology and carry the EU age verification app (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu).

The legal text states these duties as follows (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary):

• Recommender systems (Article 10). Optimisation may not exploit minors' vulnerability or attention and must include metrics for quality, safety and mental-health outcomes. Explicit user-stated preferences receive primary weight; recommendations based on implicit engagement-based signals, such as viewing time and click-through rates, are disabled by default; personal data from outside the service may not be used; and minors must not be exposed to risky information, including through repetition. Minors must be able to reset their preferences and choose at least one option not based on profiling. The text thus disables engagement-signal recommendations by default and requires a non-profiling option to be offered, rather than switching profiling off by default as the explainer's wording suggests.
• Safe settings (Article 11). Geolocation and tracking, microphone and camera, account recommendations and contact synchronisation, and push notifications are off by default. Defaults can change only for a minor above 15 who has been informed and has explicitly consented, and geolocation turns off when the session ends. Features that increase social comparison or disproportionately embellish or idealise a minor's image may not be offered to minors.
• Contacts and visibility (Article 12). Beyond pre-approved contact, exclusion from contact recommendations and default visibility only to accepted contacts, minors may be added to groups only with their explicit agreement and can block others anonymously; users without accounts never see minors' information or content; minors' contact details are not disclosed; and others may not download or screenshot minors' contact, location or account information or content.
• Economic transactions (Article 13). Minors must be told in real time that a transaction is an economic transaction, virtual-currency purchases must show their value in the official currency of the minor's Member State of residence, and services may not expose minors to variable reward systems or be designed to cause excessive, impulsive or unwanted spending; recital 31 refers to loot boxes.
• Agency, reporting and guardian tools (Articles 18–21). Providers must give minors durable control over and feedback on what is recommended to them, child-friendly reporting whose reports are handled "as a priority and without undue delay," and support resources. Guardian tools must be age-tailored, hard to circumvent and respectful of the minor's privacy, and minors must be told when they are in use; very large platforms must make them interoperable with third-party tools under the conditions of Article 6 of the Digital Markets Act. Minors and guardians may mandate a not-for-profit body to act for them and may complain to national authorities or, for chatbots under its exclusive competence, to the AI Office.
• Anti-circumvention (Article 4). Providers may not undermine compliance through contractual, commercial, technical, behavioural or interface-design means, or knowingly circumvent their obligations.

Online games and app stores

Online games must apply the rules on compulsive use, safe settings and parts of the contact rules, make guardian tools mandatory, allow under-13 access only through those tools, and guard against being used to entice minors into contacts on other services; platforms that let users create and upload games must enable those games to comply (Article 15). App stores must age-rate every app, block minors from apps rated inappropriate for their age and, where the store becomes aware of them, from apps subject to a higher EU or national minimum age, assess users' age, publish their rating methodology, and allow the certified EU age verification solution to be offered in the store (Article 16). The Commission is to facilitate Union-level codes of conduct on age rating and online games; recital 39 names the Pan-European Game Information (PEGI) system as a benchmark (Article 17) (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

AI companions and chatbots

Article 14 requires providers of AI companions and general conversational chatbots to take proportionate and effective measures to protect minors who may access their systems, including at least (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary):

• avoiding "design features and system behaviours that simulate interpersonal relations that are likely to create emotional dependencies," and applying the addictive-design measures of Article 9 (specifically its general prohibition in paragraph 1 and the time-limit and interruption duties in paragraph 3);
• ensuring that, by default, the system "does not use information or analysis derived from a minor's prior interactions in subsequent interactions," except where necessary for the minor's safety;
• transparency on economic transactions;
• enabling access for children under 13 only through guardian tools;
• state-of-the-art evaluation and testing for risks to minors, with safeguards, before placing the system on the market or putting it into service; and
• post-market monitoring, including detecting and responding to serious incidents involving minors, with an exemption for micro and small enterprises.

Where a chatbot is built into a social network, video platform or online game, it may not be activated automatically or displayed prominently, minors may not be encouraged to use it, and they must be able to opt out at any time. Providers may rely on a code of conduct the Commission has assessed as adequate to demonstrate compliance (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The Commission's explainer summarizes the regime as meaning that AI companions and chatbots "cannot be placed on the market until providers can demonstrate compliance with the new obligations under the Act and have a monitoring mechanism for emerging risks and incidents" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). The legal text does not contain a market-entry condition in those terms: it requires pre-market evaluation, testing and safeguards and post-market monitoring (the latter waived for micro and small enterprises), but no prior approval or demonstration of compliance before a system is placed on the market (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Recital 32 describes the default against reusing prior interactions as disabling "persistent conversational memory" for minors, and adds that testing should recur at regular intervals after market entry. Recital 33 allows providers whose systems are built on a general-purpose AI model with systemic risk to rely on mitigations adopted under Article 55 of the AI Act, and platform-embedded systems to draw on DSA risk assessments, while stating that neither suffices on its own. Where a social network or video-sharing platform deploys an AI companion or chatbot as a functionality, only the chatbot, app-store and agency provisions of Chapter III apply to that system (Article 8(3)); recital 34 gives placing a chatbot at the top of a minor's contacts list as an example of the nudging Article 14(2) prohibits (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). See AI Companions.

Compliance plans and independent audit

Providers of social networking and video-sharing services designated as very large online platforms under the DSA (45 million or more monthly active users in the EU) must notify the Commission of a detailed compliance plan within four months of designation, or within 30 days of the Regulation applying if already designated, and commission at their own expense an audit of the plan by independent auditors with expertise in children's rights, paediatric medicine and child psychiatry, developmental science, age assurance, interface and recommender design, and data protection. The auditors issue a final report to the Commission and the provider within two months of receiving the plan; where the Commission finds shortcomings, the provider has 30 days to submit a corrective action plan with measures implemented within at most 60 days. Neither the audit nor Commission inaction constitutes a finding of compliance (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The provider may comment on a draft audit report within 15 days, must publish a non-confidential summary of the final report, and afterwards reports annually on compliance as part of its DSA risk assessment, with compliance also covered by its DSA independent audit (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The Commission may object to an auditor whose independence is not ensured (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu); the text itself applies the DSA's auditor-independence rules in Article 37(2) and (3) by analogy and contains no separate objection power (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The press release frames the design as reversing the burden of proof, so that "service providers will have to show that their services are age-appropriate and safe by design" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu).

Obligations by actor

Source: Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary.

Enforcement and penalties

Enforcement for platforms, app stores and video gaming platforms runs through Chapter IV of the DSA; for AI companions and general conversational chatbots it runs through Chapter IX of the AI Act, so that the Commission directly supervises the most widely used platforms and chatbots while Digital Services Coordinators and national market surveillance authorities supervise the rest. National authorities designated by Member States supervise video games that are not online platforms (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). The European AI Office is named as a complaint venue for AI companions and chatbots under its exclusive competence (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). In the text, the Commission's exclusive powers attach to very large online platforms and, for AI systems, to those under its exclusive competence under Article 75(1) of the AI Act; the financial statement describes the Commission as responsible for AI companions and chatbots built on general-purpose AI models or integrated into very large platforms or search engines. The competent authority for video games is that of the Member State of the provider's main establishment, and national authorities may not take decisions that run counter to a Commission decision under the Regulation (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The Commission's explainer states that fines "can reach 6% of total worldwide annual turnover" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). In the legal text, Article 34(2) sets that ceiling for providers of AI companions and general conversational chatbots, under Article 99 of the AI Act, where the provider acted intentionally or negligently; platform infringements are sanctioned under the DSA's own enforcement chapter (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The 6% is measured against "the total worldwide annual turnover of the undertaking providing the AI companion or the general conversational chatbot in the preceding financial year." Data protection authorities supervise the personal-data processing required by the age-assurance articles and may fine infringements of those obligations under Article 83 of the GDPR up to the amount in its Article 83(5). Member States set penalties for video games that are not platforms under the rules of DSA Article 52 (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

An expedited procedure applies to services and systems the Commission supervises. The explainer describes it as "Preliminary findings within 30 days and a final decision targeted within 90 days" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu). Article 35 of the proposal states that the Commission "shall endeavour to" communicate preliminary findings within "[30] working days" of opening proceedings, the figure bracketed in the text, and to adopt a final decision within 90 working days (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The procedure covers very large online platforms and AI systems under the Commission's exclusive supervision and would apply twelve months after entry into force. The proposal's explanatory memorandum and recital 68 give the same targets as 30 and 90 days without the word "working," and the financial statement describes the working-day timelines as "unprecedented" (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The Commission would charge in-scope very large platforms, AI companions, chatbots and video gaming platforms under its supervision an annual supervisory fee. The financial statement provides for 30 additional full-time equivalents under the DSA, financed from the DSA fee, and the redeployment of 10 non-permanent full-time equivalents to reinforce the AI Office (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary). The fee is charged per in-scope service or system, covers the Commission's costs for the preceding year including the operation of the EU Age Verification Scheme, and may not exceed 0.03% of a provider's worldwide annual net income in the preceding financial year (Article 36). The financial statement estimates total staffing needs at 85 full-time equivalents, 45 of them redeployed within the implementing directorates-general, and records that the existing DSA supervisory fee has raised between EUR 40 and 60 million a year since 2024; it projects assigned revenue from the top-up of EUR 17.875 million in 2028 and EUR 15.875 million a year from 2029 to 2034 (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

The Commission is also to build Union expertise on the protection of minors, including through secondment of national staff, and to coordinate the assessment of incidents affecting minors across the Union through a voluntary rapid-response arrangement with national authorities (Articles 37 and 38). Article 41 adds the Regulation to the annex of the Representative Actions Directive (EU) 2020/1828, and Article 42 requires a review by 31 August 2030 of, among other things, the effectiveness of Articles 6 and 7 and the Regulation's impact on freedom of expression (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Relation to other EU law

The proposal states that it specifies DSA Article 28, which requires online platforms accessible to minors to ensure a high level of privacy, safety and security, and sets in "hard law" specifications from the Commission's October 2025 guidelines under that article; ongoing DSA Article 28 cases are unaffected. Social networks, video-sharing platforms and video gaming platforms that comply are deemed to comply with Article 28(1) for the matters the proposal covers. It is without prejudice to the AI Act and does not affect its prohibitions or its obligations for high-risk systems, transparency and general-purpose AI models. It is also without prejudice to the GDPR, whose Article 8 age limits apply in parallel where consent is the legal basis, to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which is under separate review regarding minors as viewers, and to EU consumer-protection law including the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive; the memorandum describes a forthcoming Digital Fairness Act as fully aligned with it (Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary).

Differences between the explainer and the legal text

The Commission's FAQ and press release describe several provisions in terms that differ from the proposal's articles: the expedited-procedure timelines (calendar days in the FAQ, working days and a best-efforts duty in Article 35); the scope of the 6% fine ceiling (general in the FAQ, limited to AI companions and chatbots acting intentionally or negligently in Article 34(2)); a market-entry condition for chatbots that the text does not contain; tracking-based personalisation off by default (the text disables implicit engagement-signal recommendations and requires a non-profiling option); app stores "carrying" the verification app (the text requires them to allow it); a Commission power to object to auditors that the text does not state; a sequence between the verification app and the digital identity wallet that the text does not set; and an under-13 route that omits the text's age-3 floor. Each difference is set out with its article references at Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary.

Reactions

Von der Leyen said on adoption: "Our KIDS Act is reversing the burden of proof - it is for platforms to show they are safe by design. And we put parents back in the driving seat, giving them the tools to help their children navigate a safer online world" (Source: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu).

Relationships

• related: Proposal for an EU KIDS Act, COM(2026) 681 — Source Summary — source summary of the proposal's full text (COM(2026) 681 final), article by article.
• depends-on: Digital Services Act (EU) — the proposal specifies and complements the DSA and uses its enforcement chapter for platforms; compliant providers are deemed to comply with DSA Article 28(1) for matters the proposal covers.
• depends-on: EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) — AI companions and general conversational chatbots are supervised under the AI Act's enforcement chapter, with fines under its Article 99.
• regulated-by: EU AI Office — complaint venue and supervisor for AI companions and chatbots under the Commission's exclusive competence.
• related: AI Companions — Article 14 obligations on companion and chatbot design for minors.
• related: AI and Children, Age Verification — minimum ages and EU age verification solutions.
• related: General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) — data protection authorities supervise the age-assurance data processing.
• related: Digital Markets Act (EU) — source of the service definitions and of the interoperability conditions for guardian tools.
• related: Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act, H.R. 7757) — unrelated U.S. bill (H.R. 7757) with the same short name.
• related: Ursula von der Leyen, European Parliament.