That’s a good point brought up when they brought this law up. Of course, it’s only relevant if “protecting the children” were their real intent. If for example they merely wanted to create a barrier to legally view or offer adult content, that would be unconstitutional and unamerican- but a law like this would serve the purpose. Providers take on a set of obvious and hidden liabilities and costs. Changing their platforms to comply with the laws of a single state, upkeep and oversight of the systems and compliance, and inevitably at some point when some minor accesses adult content despite the law, the precedent now places the onus of prevention on the provider- meaning there will likely be future law suits and such that adult providers may or may not win but will still have to face the expense and hassle of just to do business in one state. And is that even worth it one might ask- especially if in the future there are amendments to the law to address any failures in it?
Of course, proving your age using ID itself poses a hurdle. Most people don’t want to have to fish out their ID every time they want to watch some adult content, but it creates a point where someone might walk away. Of course there are legitimate identity security risks in transmitting your ID information online, it isn’t something that should be don’t frivolously, but there are also people who are beyond paranoid about giving out their information. The use of ID implies in the mind an official aspect- some connection to the government. It brings up both in the minds of the prudent and the paranoid ideas about digital surveillance. What you choose to watch may be perfectly legal, but it may not be something you want your name attached to.
The idea that somewhere there is likely someone with a list of who EXACTLY, photo, name, unique identifier and specific identifying information- watched some adult content that to their community or society has some stigma attached- could discourage a lot of people from consuming that content. Those with families or careers may especially be nervous because this implies- true or not- that at some point there could be a new story about a data leak and some individual or organization could have and use, or make public, the identifying information and preferences of viewers. The law itself carries a veiled threat. While the concept that come deity or power is always watching might not stop many people who believe that from watching adult content in private- the concept that you can safely bet a person or machine is capturing your deeds tends to motivate those not swayed by the higher power argument.
While your IP and other info can identify you and what you do online- it’s a touch more complex and there exists a doubt where one can claim that they weren’t using the device. It’s much harder to do when your face and ID number etc. are linked. Of course, people will subvert it. VPN and other trickery. Fake ID’s or spoofed ID are some possible issues- and when a bar serves a drink to a kid with a fake ID- what happens if the kid is caught? Yeah. There is more of that liability I spoke on. Similar tactics have been employed in gun control- California being a prime example. A state that many out of state retailers and even entire manufacturers refuse to do business in because the laws are intentionally obtuse and confusing. Without a legal degree it can be difficult to know even for a gun owner in the state to know if their purchase or handling of a weapon is legal, which is a strong deterrent to many people.
The thing to remember is that one doesn’t have to break any laws to be arrested or changed with a crime or sued. If a legal challenge is theoretically allowable, the charge occurs with just cause and the trial is where one defends their innocence. In other words, police can arrest you and let you and the court figure it out because police often don’t know or understand the law, and complex laws more so. People can sue you even when the suit is patiently ridiculous so long as it fits some loose legal framework. Once this process starts the costs in time and money and the consequences of such pending legal actions are on you- the accused.
So as the law stands it creates an environment that should make many adult content providers weary of the state, and smaller and independent providers generally can’t shoulder even being sued win or lose.
We will have to see how and if this evolves and how and if such measures are used- but the landscape created enables it. It is a popular tactic for example of large corporations to sue individuals or smaller entities, the large corporation has dedicated agents to handle legal affairs so effectively no disruption is felt by them, and their pockets are deep enough to absorb the costs. For many individuals and small businesses, even $2500, a small amount in court and legal fees, would be a financial burden or devastating. For high profile cases or against superior opponents you probably don’t want a $500 lawyer though, and likely need a legal team, so just being sued could cost you tens of thousands of dollars or more- if you WON.
So as the law stands it creates an environment that should make many adult content providers weary of the state, and smaller and independent providers generally can’t shoulder even being sued win or lose.