Lorna Woods

576 Followers
173 Following
3.9K Posts
Professor of Internet Law, University of Essex
University webhttps://www.essex.ac.uk/people/woods91406/lorna-woods
ORCID0000-0002-9108-040X
...(as happened with the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill on the other Henry VIII clause relating to the social media ban). There could then be a battle of wills as the Lords would have to accept that change. The Government can in this position seek to come up with a compromise, but it is hard to see what that would be in this particular set of circumstances; moreover, the Government may feel less need to compromise given its amendment is now in the Bill.

... - the Government amendment is broader however and applies to AI generated content more broadly.

So what happens next? The Bill still has to have its final reading in the Lords before heading back to the Commons. Because the bill is in a different format, the Commons have to approve new amendments. It is likely they will reject the Lords amendment and be whipped into accepting the Govt proposal ... [cont/...]

.... to try to pressure the Government to introduce something more specific on chatbots than the Henry VIII clause it had already proposed. Unfortunately, at the same sitting the Lords approved the self-same Henry VIII clause (perhaps because it was the middle of the night and there were few peers left standing). So this means as it currently stand, there are two sets of provisions potentially applicable to chatbots .... [cont./...]
Last night the Lords finished report stage on the Crime and Policing Bill. Among discussions about terrorism and abortion, some amendments related to chatbots were tabled and accepted. These were not Government amendments but came from a crossbencher, here:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2026-03-18/debates/52A1ED34-538B-43DF-922D-018E0F097354/CrimeAndPolicingBill#contribution-144EE0F8-067B-4D49-8719-9A5AE1CF72C5
From the fact the Baroness repeatedly said she was open to discussing wording, it seems that this amendment was a strategic move ...[cont/..]

Just heard back from the #OnlineSafetyAct survey folks: they'd also like to hear from people who run informal/volunteer community sites. Anyone who runs a Mastodon instance, Pixelfed server, PHPBB forum, etc. and has any UK users.

If you'd like me to put you in touch with the survey group, feel free to DM me, or email [email protected], with your name, email, and the site you run. I'll pass that on to Serrula Research, which is running the survey for Ofcom.

Simplification of digital rules must not come at the expense of human rights safeguards. I warn against any attempt to make human rights secondary to deregulation. Read my Chair’s notes following a consultation with civil society experts on AI. 👇
https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-warns-against-ai-deregulation
Online Advertising Taskforce Progress Report 2025. Statement made by Ian Murray (Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts) on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2026-03-17/HCWS1407
Making public services work for you with your digital identity

This consultation seeks views on a proposed national digital ID system for British and Irish citizens and foreign nationals with permission to be in the UK.

GOV.UK
This week the UK government announced a public consultation on digital ID that includes a suggestion that police could access the facial images held on the digital ID database to conduct facial recognition tech (FRT) searches. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/making-public-services-work-for-you-with-your-digital-identity/making-public-services-work-for-you-with-your-digital-identity
Making public services work for you with your digital identity

GOV.UK