"If this law is not amended before the end of the year, I suspect we'll have a notice on the FreeDOS website in January that says something like "Do not use if you live in California."
It seems that's exactly what others are doing. https://ostechnix.com/midnightbsd-excludes-california-digital-age-assurance-act/ https://github.com/c3d/db48x/commit/7819972b641ac808d46c54d3f5d1df70d706d286 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Sunday, March 1st, 2026 at 4:42 PM, Jim Hall via Freedos-devel <[email protected]> wrote: > Some of you may have heard about this: > > California recently passed "AB-1043 Age verification signals: software > applications and online services" that is basically a "protect the > children" law. Here's a link to the full text: > https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 > > I think it's dumb and overly broad, but we should talk about it. My > thoughts are at the end. > > I think a fair summary is: > > 1798.500 defines terms, including: > > :: (c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or > :: directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general > :: purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or > :: download an application. > > :: (f) “Developer” means a person that owns, maintains, or controls > :: an application. > :: > :: (g) “Operating system provider” means a person or entity that > :: develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a > :: computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. > > And: > > :: 1798.501 (a) An operating system provider shall do all of the following: > :: > :: (1) Provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an > :: account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of > :: that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s > :: age bracket to applications available in a covered application store. > :: > :: (2) Provide a developer who has requested a signal with respect to > :: a particular user with a digital signal via a reasonably consistent > :: real-time application programming interface that identifies, at > :: a minimum, which of the following categories pertains to the user: > :: > [they list age brackets] > :: > :: (3) Send only the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with > :: this title and shall not share the digital signal information with a > :: third party for a purpose not required by this title. > > 1798.501 (b) has requirements for developers, and also mentions an > "application store." > > And: > > :: 1798.502 (a) With respect to a device for which account setup was > :: completed before January 1, 2027, an operating system provider shall, > :: before July 1, 2027, provide an accessible interface that allows an > :: account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of > :: that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s > :: age bracket to applications available in a covered application store. > :: > :: 1798.502 (b) If an application last updated with updates on or after > :: January 1, 2026, was downloaded to a device before January 1, 2027, > :: and the developer has not requested a signal with respect to the user of > :: the device on which the application was downloaded, the developer shall > :: request a signal from a covered application store with respect to that > :: user before July 1, 2027. > > 1798.503 sets penalties for violations. > > 1798.504 says the this isn't meant to "modify, impair, or supersede" > antitrust laws (i.e. operating system vendors with their own app > store) but also says: > > :: (f) This title does not apply to any of the following: > :: > :: (1) A broadband internet access service, as defined in Section 3100. > :: > :: (2) A telecommunications service, as defined in Section 153 of Title 47 > :: of the United States Code. > :: > :: (3) The delivery or use of a physical product. > > And: > > :: 1798.505. This title shall become operative on January 1, 2027. > > -- > > My thoughts: > > DOS was created long before the concept of an "app store" -- and DOS > has never had "accounts." My immediate impression is that this law > cannot apply to FreeDOS (or any DOS) because there's just no mechanism > to accommodate it. No DOS can: not MS-DOS, not DR DOS, not PC DOS, .. > no DOS can do this. Not to mention all the legacy DOS applications > from the 1980s and 1990s. > > It seems clear the law was intended for Windows and Mac. But that's > not how the law was written. As I said, I think it's dumb and overly > broad. > > I'm curious if anyone knows how (or if) other open source operating > systems are responding to this. I imagine the large Linux distros > (like Red Hat, Ubuntu, ..) have the resources behind them to do > something, but smaller distros will not. > > If this law is not amended before the end of the year, I suspect we'll > have a notice on the FreeDOS website in January that says something > like "Do not use if you live in California." > > > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel > _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
