What’s New? June 2026

By Alex Heshmaty on June 18, 2026

Online safety roundup

The UK government has announced that it will ban social media for under 16s, in line with a growing number of jurisdictions placing restrictions on social media use by children since Australia took the first step in December 2025. The move was widely anticipated following the publication of a consultation and pilot study, and after the government came under pressure from the Lords and activists, including bereaved parents of children who claim social media use was responsible for their children’s deaths. The ban is due to come into effect in Spring 2027 and will apply to Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X, but not messaging services such as WhatsApp or Signal. However, concerns have been raised that the measure will be largely ineffective (60% of Australian children say they are getting round the ban) – and one of the bereaved parents, Ian Russell, has criticised the move as a “sledgehammer” technique which is likely to cause more problems, and claims that is has been “rushed” through potentially for political reasons.

Separately, the government has requested that tech companies behind smartphone and tablet operating systems (primarily Google/Android and Apple) ensure that explicit images are blocked at device level unless the user is over 18. Speaking at London Tech Week, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, warned that, unless this type of age verification process has been implemented voluntarily within three months (ie by early September 2026), the government will legislate accordingly. It has also issued guidance for parents of young children on screen time, suggesting that children aged 2 to 5 should be allowed a maximum of one hour per day and that it should be avoided altogether for anyone younger.

Ofcom is still struggling to enforce the Online Safety Act (OSA), with many adult entertainment websites refusing to implement age checks and even outright mocking the regulator. It has failed in its attempts to block a US based online suicide forum, which has been implicated in the deaths of 160 UK citizens, despite pursuing action for over a year, and has now issued a £950,000 fine. Nevertheless Ofcom continues its efforts to promote compliance, publishing a joint statement on age assurance with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

Two pieces of new legislation which came into force in April 2026 may help Ofcom in its regulatory efforts. The Crime and Policing Act (CPA) 2026 tightens up obligations on social media companies to remove non-consensual sexual images, plugs loopholes on AI “nudification” tools and provides more power to the government to tackle AI generated content. Meanwhile, the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 paves the way for the social media ban for under 16s.

AI roundup

AI in the Crown Court

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced that it will be trialling artificial intelligence (AI) in the Crown Court, in an attempt to speed up processes and tackle the backlog. The primary AI tool which the MoJ press release mentions is referred to as a “legal assistant” (presumably some kind of LLM wrapper interface) designed “to support legal professionals with routine casework, including research and case analysis”. Another AI tool helps to “identify trial-ready cases and group similar hearings together”, and finally probation officers have been equipped with transcription software called “Justice Transcribe” (although why this is touted as “AI” is unclear). All these measures are being branded as components of the “Prime Minister’s AI Exemplars programme”, with the trial denoted as part of “AI Growth Labs“.

Text and data mining exception

The government has published its long awaited report and impact assessment on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems. The key takeaway is that the proposed introduction of an exception to copyright law for text and data mining (TDM), which would essentially allow AI providers to train their LLMs without fear of being sued for copyright infringement, will no longer be pursued by the government, at least for the time being.

Lyrical copyright

Several music companies, including Universal Music Group (UMG), are suing Anthropic, arguing that song lyrics generated by its Claude LLM are derivatives of the publishers’ lyrics that “compete with and dilute the market” to their detriment. The core argument appears to have adopted the obiter of a judge in a previous US case brought against Meta by several authors including Sarah Silverman, who said that the plaintiffs had failed to capitalise on a “potentially winning argument” that the LLM could potentially “flood the market with similar works, causing market dilution”. But at the same time, UMG has agreed a licensing deal with music streaming platform Spotify that will allow subscribers to generate song covers and remixes using songs from participating artists. Other recent creative copyright AI stories include Taylor Swift applying to trademark her voice and appearance in an apparent attempt to shield herself from AI impersonation, and the Authors Guild warning publishers to avoid uploading manuscripts and authors’ personal information into consumer-facing AI systems.

AI safety

A flurry of litigation, currently largely US-based, is testing the liability of AI providers. The parents of 19 year old Sam Nelson, who died after taking a combination of drugs which, it is alleged was suggested to him by ChatGPT, are suing OpenAI and its founder and CEO Sam Altman in a California court. The father of 36 year old Jonathan Gavalas, who committed suicide after allegedly being encouraged to take his own life by Gemini whilst in a state of psychosis (also allegedly induced by the chatbot), is bringing a wrongful death claim against Google. Meanwhile, the Attorney General of Florida is bringing a wide ranging lawsuit against OpenAI over the design of ChatGPT, alleging that the company and its boss Sam Altman are are endangering and addicting children, aiding and abetting mass shooters, and coaxing users into suicide.

Hallucinations galore

Despite previous judicial warnings about lawyers relying on AI for research, the practice appears to be gathering pace and leading to more so-called “digital hallucinations” and headaches all round. Recently two highly prestigious firms on both sides of the Atlantic – Sullivan & Cromwell and Pinsent Masons – have come a cropper.

EU AI

The sole final enforcement action taken by the EU in relation to alleged data protection breaches in connection with generative AI, has been annulled. Despite all the concerns about the EU frightening off AI investment due to excessive regulation, there has so far been scant enforcement action against AI companies by EU regulators. However, a German regional court has ruled that Google AI Overviews do not constitute search engine results and, as such, attract direct liability for their statements. Meanwhile, the European Commission has adopted a proposal for the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA), with the aim of “strengthening the EU’s cloud and AI ecosystem, investment and infrastructure”.

Other news

Social media

In a recent article on Section 230, we discussed a landmark social media trial in California in which a young woman claimed that the intentional design of social media algorithms caused her addiction and negatively affected her mental health. The jury has ruled in favour of the plaintiff, with fines of $6 million in compensatory damages being issued against Meta and Google. The ruling is being appealed.

Fake reviews

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is investigating five companies, including Just Eat and Autotrader, as part of a probe into fake and misleading online reviews. Around 50% of online reviews are fake according to a recent report. See our separate article on fake online reviews.

Online subscriptions

The Department for Business and Trade has announced that new consumer protections for subscriptions will come into effect from Spring 2027. Measures will include allowing consumers to cancel online subscriptions over the internet without having to phone a helpline, and auto-renewals will need to provide more warning to consumers and provide a 14 day cooling off period.

Net neutrality

Concerns have been raised that the EU’s Digital Networks Act (DNA), which aims to consolidate various pieces of existing legislation related to digital infrastructure, could pose a threat to net neutrality.

Online gaming

Online multiplayer features of video games are often shut down after a certain period of time, normally once game sequels are released and/or active players have dwindled. However, gamers who argue that the removal of online functionality essentially makes certain games unplayable, have petitioned the European Parliament, and some are even taking direct legal action against games publishers.