If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Players of the Japanese mobile RPG Twinkle Star Knights have recently discovered that their favorite characters have become faceless silhouettes on iOS after Apple refused to approve several pieces of artwork it considered “potentially offensive to some users.” To avoid being pulled from the App Store, the developers decided to cover the affected illustrations in black, leaving large portions of the cast as shadow figures. The dispute began in August when an update for the fantasy-themed gacha game repeatedly failed Apple’s review process. Apple flagged specific animations and illustrations, later suggesting that even artwork from the game’s 2023 launch might also need to be altered. The publisher apologized to iPhone players and attempted to keep the game accessible by releasing a temporary cloud version while it adjusted the art. That effort failed as well. Even after redesigning many female characters, Apple again declared the game to be “in violation of guidelines.” After more than two months of revisions and rejections, the developers settled on an unusual solution. Artwork that passed Apple’s checks remains visible, while everything still being reviewed appears only as black silhouettes. This fix allowed the game to remain downloadable, even though much of its once-vivid cast now appears obscured. Such a step is uncommon in mobile gaming and has raised concern among players who see it as evidence of how platform owners can quietly steer creative content. Apple’s broad interpretation of what might offend has long been a source of tension for developers seeking artistic freedom. For the moment, Twinkle Star Knights is still available on both the App Store and Google Play, but the iOS version stands as a literal and symbolic reminder of how easily expression can be dimmed when gatekeepers control the light. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Apple Censorship Forces Japanese Game to Hide Characters appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

The legal pushback against Flock is starting to take real shape. For years, the company sold its cameras as a convenient public safety tool, a kind of low-cost, high-tech neighborhood watch. Become a Member and Keep Reading… Reclaim your digital freedom. Get the latest on censorship, cancel culture, and surveillance, and learn how to fight back. Join Already a supporter? Sign In. (If you’re already logged in but still seeing this, refresh this page to show the post.) The post When the Watchers Get Watched: How One Public Records Request Shook the Surveillance Machine appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Australia’s online digital ID checks and under-16 social media ban are now facing a constitutional challenge, with a coalition of Australians led by NSW Libertarian MP John Ruddick preparing to contest the new law in the High Court. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024, scheduled to take effect on December 10, 2025, will require all users to prove they are over 16 before accessing major platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, X, and Snapchat. To comply with this, people will have to give up their privacy by verifying with a government-issued ID. John Ruddick announced the challenge after being elected President of the Digital Freedom Project (DFP) at its inaugural general meeting this week. Ruddick said the DFP’s mission is to “raise public awareness about this East German-style intrusion by the state into our private lives” and to “launch a High Court challenge that argues the law is unconstitutional as it is a violation of the long-accepted ‘implied constitutional freedom of political communication’.” He argued that the new law will be burdensome for both social media users and platforms, with companies facing fines of up to $53 million per day for breaches. “The guts of the matter is that to have a social media account in Australia from 10 December, you will need to prove to the social media platform you are over 16,” Ruddick said. He added that the verification process could require uploading identification documents, which would enable the eSafety Commissioner to “track what websites you visit to double check you really are over 16.” More: YouTube to Get Australia Digital ID Age Checks by Year’s End, Plus New AI Profiling For US Users Although the government tries to maintain that participation in its Digital ID program will be voluntary, Ruddick contends that the system effectively pushes Australians toward it, creating a centralized system of online identity. “The government however, will make it easier for you…if you just sign up for Digital ID…and that is the whole purpose of the legislation,” he said. Questions remain over how the law will be implemented. Although Labor has insisted that government ID will not be required, social media companies told a parliamentary inquiry last month that they may still need to collect identification as part of “age assurance processes.” Opposition communications spokesperson Melissa McIntosh said the situation needs clarification. “We’re hearing now that digital identification may need to be required,” she said. “A platform may compel an Australian to use their government ID. We didn’t sign up for that.” Ruddick said the DFP’s legal team expects to file the High Court case soon. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Launching a High Court Challenge Against Australia’s Social Media ID Check Law appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Google is slightly relaxing its controversial new Android policy on sideloading, but the shift does little to change its overall direction. The company confirmed that it will still move ahead with mandatory developer identity verification for nearly all apps while introducing a limited “advanced flow” that lets “experienced users” continue installing software from outside the Play Store. According to Google, the new system will feature multiple security warnings meant to deter casual users from downloading unverified apps. “It will include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands,” the company said. The process is still being developed, with feedback now underway before finalization in the coming months. The adjustment follows backlash from developers and Android fans who criticized Google’s original plan to block apps created by unverified developers starting next year. The community argued that the move would effectively close off Android’s long-standing openness by removing the ability to install software freely. Despite the new language, Google’s latest policy maintains the same structure. Developer ID verification will still be required for nearly all app distribution. Only students and hobbyists will be allowed to share apps with a limited number of devices without providing identification, and businesses deploying internal software will remain exempt. For everyone else, verification and a $25 registration fee will be mandatory, including for apps distributed outside Google Play. Previously, there was no charge for independent distribution. The rollout schedule remains the same. Developers who distribute apps outside the Play Store began receiving early-access invitations on November 3, while Play Store developers will get theirs starting November 25. The early-access period runs through March 2026, after which the verification program will open to all developers. The rules take effect in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand in September 2026, and globally in 2027. Google maintains that the new requirements are about security, not control. The company cites growing scams in Southeast Asia where criminals impersonate banks and convince victims to install fraudulent “verification” apps that intercept messages and authentication codes. Requiring verified developer identities, Google argues, will make it harder for such attackers to operate repeatedly under new names. The company describes the “advanced flow” as a system designed for users “who have a higher risk tolerance and want the ability to download unverified apps.” It says the system is also intended to “resist coercion,” preventing scammers from tricking users into disabling safeguards. Developers say the new policy still undermines the openness that has defined Android since its launch. The “advanced flow” may technically preserve sideloading, but in practice, it wraps it in multiple warnings and verification barriers that limit who will actually use it. Exactly what the new sideloading experience will look like is still unclear, though it is expected to involve several confirmation screens and security prompts. For many users, that may prove cumbersome compared to today’s methods. While Google’s updated language softens its tone, the company’s overall approach remains the same. It continues to tighten control over app distribution while framing the effort as a safety measure. The new “advanced flow” offers a symbolic nod to Android’s open past, but the platform’s future will be far more regulated by Google’s rules, not user choice. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Google Softens Planned Android Sideloading Ban but Keeps Developer ID Verification appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. UK Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is pressing Ofcom to accelerate the rollout of the controversial censorship law, the Online Safety Act, warning that delays could weaken protections for vulnerable users. In a letter to the communications regulator, she said: “I remain deeply concerned that delays in implementing duties, such as user empowerment, could hinder our work to protect women and girls from harmful content and protect users from antisemitism.” Kendall is determined to enforce the controversial law quickly, even as more people have finally realized that the Online Safety Act grants excessive power to regulators over what citizens can say or share online. Ofcom has confirmed that it expects to publish by July next year a register identifying which companies will face the strictest obligations, including mandatory age verification. That schedule is roughly a year later than initially promised. The regulator said the delay was due to “factors beyond its control,” citing a legal challenge that raised “complex issues.” One challenge involves 4chan and Kiwi Farms, platforms often targeted by politicians seeking tighter online speech regulation. Reclaim The Net recently reported that 4chan’s legal team had rejected Ofcom’s attempt to impose fines under the Act, arguing that the regulator’s enforcement powers overreach. The law has also drawn criticism abroad. The US State Department condemned the UK’s online censorship laws, including the Online Safety Act, warning that the powers granted to Ofcom could restrict the open exchange of ideas. We also covered the growing concern among technology companies that the Act’s broad language and compliance costs could force them to reconsider their presence in the UK. From a free speech perspective, the Online Safety Act raises several concerns: Overbroad definitions of harm: The Act compels platforms to remove not only illegal material but also content labeled “harmful,” a term so vague that it risks encompassing lawful political, artistic, or controversial expression. Chilling effect on discussion: Fear of penalties could lead platforms to preemptively delete legitimate speech to avoid potential violations. Pressure on smaller platforms: Complex compliance rules may drive independent or overseas platforms to leave the UK altogether, reducing online diversity and choice. Kendall’s demand for faster enforcement shows that the government isn’t getting the message and intends to move ahead regardless of opposition. Yet the real test will come when Ofcom begins applying its powers in practice. If enforcement is heavy-handed, the UK could find itself at odds with the open internet tradition it once helped shape. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK Tech Secretary Urges Ofcom to Fast-Track Censorship Law Enforcement appeared first on Reclaim The Net.