California’s latest online safety law has divided Silicon Valley in an unusual way. The California age-gating law, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, requires device makers like Apple and Google to collect users’ ages and share age brackets with apps so that platforms can adjust what children see online.
Most major tech companies have supported the measure. Meta, Google, Snap, OpenAI, and Pinterest praised it as one of the most balanced and privacy-friendly approaches to date. Google described it as a “thoughtful framework” that allows consistent age-based restrictions across devices. For once, much of Big Tech is celebrating regulation rather than fighting it, because this law pushes responsibility upstream, to the operating systems themselves.
Apple is not celebrating. The company warned that device-level age checks could expose “sensitive, personally identifiable information,” even if data is shared only as broad age brackets. For Apple, which builds its brand around privacy, transmitting any kind of age signal between apps feels like a step too far. It highlights how Apple’s stance on user data differs sharply from that of competitors built on advertising and engagement.
Under the California age-gating law, parents or users enter a birth date when setting up a new device. Apple and Google then sort the information into one of four categories, which are shared with apps like YouTube, Instagram, or TikTok through an API. This helps app developers avoid building their own verification systems, but it also means Apple’s devices will become the main entry point for compliance across the industry.
That is precisely why companies like Google and Meta quietly view the law as a win. By letting operating systems handle the age-check process, California’s approach shields them from the lawsuits and strict parental consent mandates that states like Texas and Utah introduced. Those laws forced platforms to collect ID documents and verify age directly. In contrast, California’s framework gives them a shared, privacy-friendly signal and reduces legal risk.
Apple already provides extensive parental controls through Family Sharing and Screen Time, so the company sees this new law as unnecessary and potentially invasive. Meanwhile, rivals like Meta and Snap gain an easier compliance path while projecting support for child safety. The divide reflects each company’s core business model: Apple sells privacy as a feature, while others profit from user data and algorithmic engagement.
Hollywood also resisted the bill. Netflix, Amazon, and other studios argued that device-level age gating could confuse families who share streaming accounts. Lawmakers rejected those objections, passing the measure unanimously in the State Assembly. With Newsom’s signature, California handed Big Tech a regulation it can live with and gave Apple another privacy dilemma to solve before 2027.
If this system works, it could become a national model for digital safety. If it fails, Apple’s privacy-first warnings may end up shaping the next round of child protection laws. Either way, California’s move signals that Big Tech is now negotiating, not just fighting, the future of regulation.
(via Politico)
