
Spotify may delete accounts if users fail new mandatory age checks
The music streaming app has begun asking its users to verify if they are aged over 18 by using facial age estimations and ID verification.
On its website, it reads: 'You cannot use Spotify if you don't meet the minimum age requirements for the market you're in.
'If you cannot confirm you're old enough to use Spotify, your account will be deactivated and eventually deleted.'
This has sent many on social media into a flurry, with one user saying, 'the fact that you need to verify your age or have your account deleted really shows what's wrong with the world right now'.
The Open Rights Group, which campaigns for digital freedoms, said: 'Bad law makes for bad, incoherent outcomes.' The prompt users on the Spotify app are receiving . / Credit: @EdgeE50124/X
When will Spotify use an age check?
Spotify has told ITV News that users may be prompted to complete an age check for certain age-restricted content, for example, when trying to watch a music video that has been labelled 18+ by its rightsholder.
However, it is not clear exactly how consistently the measures are being applied.
While some social media users have shared screenshots of their age verification requests on the app, others have said they have not been asked yet.
How does it work?
Spotify will first ask users to verify their age through facial recognition. Users must take a selfie, which will be analysed using face-scanning technology from verification service Yoti to estimate their age.
If the system determines a user is underage, their account will be deactivated.
However, Spotify will offer a 90-day grace period. During this time, users will receive an email allowing them to reactivate their account, and then they must complete an ID verification within seven days.
To complete ID verification on Spotify, tap your profile picture at the top of the app, go to Settings and Privacy, then select Account, and tap Age Check.
If Spotify still can't confirm a user's age during the 90-day grace period, or if no action is taken within seven days of reactivation, the account will be permanently deleted.
So on top of all the age restriction bullshit happening in the UK right now, it turns out Spotify is implementing this as well.
The fact that you need to verify your age or have your account deleted really shows what's wrong with the world right now. pic.twitter.com/NQekRbtWGh — 💖QTheFemboy💖 (@QuxRo_VRC) July 30, 2025
Spotify has said its service is designed for users aged 13 and over, but it hosts songs and music videos aimed at mature audiences.
Last month, The Times reported that the app had also hosted pornographic podcasts, despite Spotify's ban on 'sexually explicit content'.
Spotify is the latest tech firm to roll out age checks in a bid to stop children from accessing adult material.
The move follows new rules introduced under the UK government's new Online Safety Act, though Spotify has told ITV News: 'Age assurance has been live as of the last few weeks, and is not implemented solely because of any one law.'
As of last Friday, tech firms must verify the age of users trying to access pornography and other adult content, such as graphic violence. They must also enforce age limits set out in their terms of service.
The new rules have already triggered changes. Porn sites now require age verification, while platforms such as Reddit and X have added age checks on some posts and videos.
Companies that fail to comply risk fines of up to 10% of their global turnover and fines of up to £18 million.
Ofcom investigates pornographic companies
This all comes as Ofcom announced on Thursday that it has launched investigations into 34 pornography websites over concerns they may not be complying with the new age-check rules under the Online Safety Act.
The regulator said it had opened formal investigations into whether companies including 8579 LLC, AVS Group Ltd, Kick Online Entertainment SA and Trendio Ltd had 'highly effective' age verification systems in place to stop children accessing pornography across 34 websites.
Ofcom said it prioritised these companies based on the level of risk their services posed and the number of users they attract.
These new cases add to 11 investigations already under way, including probes into 4chan, an online suicide forum, seven file-sharing services, First Time Videos LLC and Itai Tech Ltd. Wikipedia is currently engaged in legal action with the UK government. / Credit: iStock
Wikipedia takes action against government
Meanwhile, Wikipedia has launched legal action against the UK government over the Online Safety Act.
The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), the non-profit that runs the site, argues that certain regulations under the law, which classify Wikipedia as a 'category one' service, should not apply to it.
Under the act, a company falls into category one if it has content recommender systems and 34 million UK users a month, or if it combines such systems with share functions and has at least seven million users monthly.
Wikipedia says that if forced to comply, it may have to either limit the number of users on its site or impose verification on users who don't want it, a move it says would go against its principles.
In court last week, WMF's barrister Rupert Paines said the new rules would require platforms to verify users and filter out content from those who aren't verified.
He warned this could render Wikipedia articles 'gibberish' unless all users were verified, and noted that many editors rely on anonymity to avoid online harassment or hacking.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
In the time of tariffs, Nvidia and AMD cut unusual deals with Trump
Hello, and welcome to TechScape. My Spotify playlists are undergoing a British invasion this week. Here's what I'm listening to: PinkPantheress, Lola Young and Evita in London. Donald Trump announced this week that two US chipmakers would tithe 15% of their revenue from sales in China to the US government. Paying for the license to sell to Chinese customers represents an unprecedented deal. My colleague Helen Davidson reports from Taipei: The chipmakers Nvidia and AMD have agreed to give the US government 15% of their revenue from advanced chips sold to China in return for export licences to the key market. The arrangement will lead to Nvidia giving 15% of its revenue from Chinese sales of its H20 chips, and AMD giving 15% of revenue from Chinese sales of its MI308 chips, according to reports citing US officials. The H20 and MI308 chips were banned from sale to China in April, despite the lower-powered H20 being designed specifically to abide by restrictions introduced by the Biden administration. Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang, head of the most valuable company in the world at $4.44tn, has been lobbying the White House for months to open up sales in China, where the US still prohibits sales of Nvidia's most advanced chips over national security concerns. In July, Trump relaxed some restrictions imposed by Joe Biden's administration. The deal with Nvidia and AMD seems as much about personally appealing to Trump as it does about generating revenue for the US government. The agreement has all the trappings of Trump entering into business with the chipmakers. In a way, it's a version of a playbook other major tech companies have been trying out as Trump is dramatically changing the international business landscape. Apple announced a $100bn investment commitment in US manufacturing. CEO Tim Cook, who had made the journey to the White House himself, presented Trump with a glass trophy (including 24 karat gold base) designating the president a graduate of the Apple Manufacturing Academy, launched in Michigan the week prior. During his meeting with Cook, Trump said he would levy a 100% tariff on semiconductor chips, which could set both Apple and Nvidia back billions. However, the president said: 'If you're building in the United States of America, there's no charge.' Both Nvidia and Apple are likely to be exempted from the tariffs. Each appears to have paid for the privilege – Apple with its domestic investment, Nvidia with its revenue-sharing agreement. OpenAI launched the new version of the artificial intelligence that underpins ChatGPT last week. There are quite a few aspects of the release to consider to understand it fully – what the company is saying, where the AI race between tech giants stands, the model's new capabilities and pitfalls, the environmental impact – so I've rounded up the Guardian's coverage of GPT-5 below. OpenAI said GPT-5 has marked improved coding and writing capabilities over its predecessor. My colleague Dan Milmo reports: OpenAI has claimed to have taken a 'significant step' towards artificial general intelligence (AGI) with the launch of its latest upgrade to ChatGPT, but has admitted there are still 'many things' missing in its quest to create a system able to do humans' jobs. Sam Altman, OpenAI's chief executive, called the model a 'significant step forward' to achieving the theoretical state of AGI, which the startup defines as a highly autonomous system that outperforms humans at most economically valuable work – or, in other words, can do their jobs. Read the full story on the unveiling of GPT-5: OpenAI says latest ChatGPT upgrade is big step forward but still can't do humans' jobs The race towards artificial general intelligence is running hot, with tech giants pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into the technology, but like OpenAI, Google and Meta acknowledge they have not reached that goal yet. Dan Milmo and Dara Kerr report: '[It is] missing something quite important, many things quite important,' said Altman, such as the model's inability to 'continuously learn' even after its launch. In other words, these systems are impressive but they have yet to crack the autonomy that would allow them to do a full-time job. Last month, Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive of Facebook parent Meta, said development of superintelligence – another theoretical state of AI where a system far exceeds human cognitive abilities – is 'now in sight'. Google's AI unit on Tuesday outlined its next step to AGI by announcing an unreleased model that trains AIs to interact with a convincing simulation of the real world. Read the full story: 'It's missing something': AGI, superintelligence and a race for the future Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion How we know OpenAI's new model is not an omniscient presence that will lord over all humanity: GPT-5 is making some goofy mistakes. It struggles with maps in a way a 10-year-old might. Per my colleague Josh Taylor: when Guardian Australia asked the latest model of ChatGPT to identify the number of Rs in Australia's states and territories, it could identify those which did. But the AI also believed Northern Territory had just three Rs not five. When asked to produce it on a map, spelled the territory as 'Northan Territor'. Read the full story: OpenAI unveils ChatGPT-5 and its hyped 'PhD level' intelligence struggled with basic spelling and geography GPT-5 is a more powerful model than its predecessor, meaning it will consume more resources to answer each query. Here's what experts told Aisha Kehoe Down: 'A more complex model like GPT-5 consumes more power both during training and during inference. It's also targeted at long thinking … I can safely say that it's going to consume a lot more power than GPT-4,' said Rakesh Kumar, a professor at the University of Illinois, currently working on the energy consumption of computation and AI models. Given recent reports that ChatGPT handles 2.5bn requests a day, the total consumption of GPT-5 could reach the daily electricity demand of 1.5m US homes. Read the full story: OpenAI will not disclose GPT-5's energy use. It could be higher than past models Surprise: AOL, formerly known as America Online, was still offering dial-up internet service in 2025. My colleague Edward Helmore reports: The hisses, pings and screeches that introduced millions of Americans to the nascent online world are to be formally retired when AOL's dial-up internet shuts down in late September. At its peak in the late 1990s and early 2000s, AOL had over 23 million subscribers in the US, making it the dominant internet service provider at the time. Currently, only a small fraction of US households – about 175,000 – still rely on dial-up for internet access and web browser platforms. In 2013, Pew Research found that just 3% of American households used dial-up internet. The 2025 figure represents less than 0.5% of the current population. What once seemed ubiquitous in the US and UK is now a relic and only a partially important piece of the history of the internet. Many parts of the world that are now online never experienced – perhaps endured might be the more apt word – dial-up internet. They jumped straight to broadband, wifi, or the mobile internet, a phenomenon known as technological leapfrogging. If you're feeling nostalgic for the early days of the internet, though, you can listen to the classic, grating sound of dialing into the web via Wikipedia's page on the subject. TikTok to replace trust and safety team in Germany with AI and outsourced labor Companies aiding Trump's immigration crackdown see 'extraordinary' revenues Staff at UK's top AI institute complain to watchdog about its internal culture Social media accounts of Palestinians desperate for funds are being flagged as spam 'A million calls an hour': Israel relying on Microsoft cloud for expansive surveillance of Palestinians


Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Music fans ditch 'expensive' subscriptions like Spotify for nostalgic 90s players that cost less than £20
Gen Z are cancelling their Spotify premium accounts and turning to MP3 players due to the rising cost of subscriptions to the streaming service. 'Broke' youngsters have seemingly grown tired of paying for 'rented' music and said that they would rather put their money towards buying an MP3 player in a one-time fixed cost. The gadgets came out in the 90s and rose in popularity as they got smaller and became more portable over the course of the 2000s. However, with the rise of smartphones, many music lovers moved to platforms like Spotify to download their songs. However, increasingly pricey monthly memberships are driving a resurgence of MP3 players, with many frugal young adults opting to invest their money in the cheap device. An individual premium account in the UK costs £11.99 a month, meaning single users will spend almost £145 a year to listen to their favourite tracks. Some MP3 players, with enough internal storage for 2,000 songs, are being sold on Argos for as little as £19.99. Simonalisa, thought to be from the US, has an Instagram account dedicated to her love of Noughties fashion and culture and said she no longer wants to shell out money on music every month. The content creator, who is in her twenties, said in the clip: 'I can't be the only one that does not want to pay the Spotify premium membership. I've been toughing it out with those ads but you know what? I've had enough. 'I got myself an MP3 player which has [storage] up to 64GB. I can put 12,000 songs on here, unlimited skips, I can pick the song I want to listen to on this little guy and I'm not paying $100 a year. Thank you.' The video racked up 11,000 likes on the platform, with many commenters agreeing that MP3 players are the way forward. One wrote: 'Propaganda I will never fall for: Buying Spotify premium.' Another penned: 'Funny enough, I was helping my big sister clean out her room and found her old MP3 and she gave it to me, so yeah I will be doing this.' A third said: 'Me burning my playlists on CDs because I'm tired of the Spotify algorithm.' A fourth commented: 'I have one, it used to be my dad's when he was younger now it's mine and I adore it.' In another Instagram video, Simonalisa wrote: 'A broke girl with her MP3 player because subscriptions are too expensive.' Leo, 19, is now using his old iPod to listen to music instead of paying for a monthly Spotify subscription. He filmed himself adding songs to his scratched-up 18-year-old iPod via his computer and captioned the clip: 'Spotify byeeee.' Polly, from the UK, also did not want to pay £11.99 a month to listen to music, so she went ' back to basics ' and dug out her old MP3 player. Another TikTok user, thought to be from south east Asia, said they had run out of Spotify premium and decided to start uploading tracks to their old Sony Walkman instead. Samuel Irene, 23, from Rochester in New York, made a TikTok video showing his MP3 player and said: 'The biggest reason why I am no longer paying for Spotify Premium anymore.' He then added: 'MP3 players rule!' Another TikTok user, from Norfolk in the US, said that she is going to go back to her trusty Sony Walkman to listen to music after a negative experience using Spotify. She said in the clip: 'Spotify is about to remind everyone why MP3 players were a thing. Y'all remember burning CDs? If you weren't alive, get hip, start now, it's never too late. 'Sweet baby love, in what world do I pay you money for music that I already don't get to keep. This is music on loan and then you're still going to give me ads? 'Do you know who never gave me ads? My Sony Walkman. I've still got him, it's not a problem.' She captioned the video: 'You pulling the MP3 player out of storage? Because what's happening on Spotify?' The streaming platform also offers a duo account - which is shared between two people - is £16.99 a month and a family account, which is up to six accounts, costs £19.99 a month. Students are able to get their account a discounted rate of £5.99 a month, which adds up to almost £72 a year. Its competitor, Apple Music, has undercut the platform by £1 with its individual account, however, the prices for students and families are the same. In 2023, Spotify raised the price of its single-account premium plan for the first time since 2011 to £10.99, but hiked it up again to £11.99. Others wrote about their experience with Spotify and MP3 players X, as they expressed their excitement to go back to older tech Rosario also posted on TikTok and said that she was 'breaking up' with Spotify this year and going back to her MP3 player. She added: 'Taking me & my 12,000+ songs somewhere else. But seriously, [I'm] so over paying for music!' Another user said that they had 'run out' of Spotify premium and so they decided to dig out their old Sony Walkman. Another American woman who goes by the username @ online said that she also cancelled her Spotify membership and moved to MP3. 'I have my Garfield MP3 player. It has an SD card slot so I can listen to 32GB of music if I want to,' she said in video. Others have taken to X to express their excitement that old technology is coming back into fashion. One wrote: 'My MP3 player arrives today and I'm so excited I can download all my music and put it on there and stop relying on Spotify.' Another penned: 'All that Spotify ID verification makes me consider switching to Deezer or just get an MP3 player.' A third said: 'Spotify should launch a retro MP3 player that can hold playlists instead of CDs offline. Bring back the iPod.' This comes after Gen Z's obsession with vinyl in 2023 caused a huge hike in sales. Industry statistics reported at the time suggested that vinyl sales are at their highest level in 33 years after declining in the 1980s and 1990s with the advent of the compact disc – which itself is enjoying a resurgence after losing out to MP3 players and services like Spotify. More than 250,000 vinyl records were sold last week – the most sales in a seven-day period this century – and 5.9 million were bought throughout 2023, according to trade body BPI. Stores say younger audiences are responsible for buying the majority of LPs, snapping up releases from the likes of Taylor Swift, Olivia Rodrigo and Lewis Capaldi as well as classics from the likes of Pink Floyd and Fleetwood Mac. But experts say the Gen Z push is also driven by a desire to support their favourite artists and to escape 'streaming fatigue', overwhelmed by the endlessly perfect curation of music attuned to their tastes that is served up by algorithms. Peter Litchfield, a music producer, told the Daily Mail: 'Younger generations are also experiencing streaming fatigue. 'Like most online media, music consumption is algorithmically driven. It is cultivated for us. Much of the experience is passive. 'Many are seeking a new, independent experience; something you feel more in control of, something you can take physical ownership of. 'Showing your appreciation of vinyl on your social media channels is a way to express identity and taste, a way to stand out from the crowd.' He added there still remains a nostalgia factor for the pops, crackles and warmth that come with playing a vinyl via an analogue needle. 'Where vinyl is concerned, audiophiles enjoy the analog nature of vinyl, appreciating the imperfections and unique character, and also make a case for its warmer, more authentic sound when compared to digital formats,' he said. 'There is this notion that "real music fans listen to vinyl". In essence, vinyl has become cool again.' Patrizia Leighton, director at HMV, told the Daily Mail the majority of turntable sales bought at Christmas were either purchased by or for Gen Z-ers – adding that other physical formats were also back in vogue. She said: 'Vinyl – as well as CD and to an extent cassette – has been strong all year, as the BPI results found. 'HMV now makes up around 50 per cent of all physical sales in the UK and Christmas trading was strong for us across vinyl in particular. We also saw continued growth in CD and cassette, albeit the latter from a pretty low base. 'We can be fairly certain that the upward trend will have continued to the end of the year across the industry. 'We also saw really strong sales of turntables over the festive season with Gen-Z customers buying the bulk of those – or having them bought for them as gifts – which suggests there's a healthy future for vinyl as new fans go on to build their collections.'


Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
High Court rejects Wikipedia challenge to online censorship laws
The High Court has rejected a challenge by Wikipedia to Britain's online safety rules after the company claimed the laws could force it to block millions of people in the UK from visiting its website. A judge said the claim by the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organisation which helps run the online encyclopaedia, failed to prove the online safety laws were flawed. However, Mr Justice Johnson said the decision did not give Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary or digital regulator Ofcom a 'green light' to 'significantly impede Wikipedia's operations' in a way that would harm free expression. Wikipedia had sought to challenge a set of regulations that form part of the Online Safety Act, the UK's flagship tech laws, arguing the rules could see it labelled a 'category one' service and subject to the strictest scrutiny. Websites will qualify for this category if they have more than seven million UK users. Wikipedia had claimed that placing it in this category, intended for social media and internet search giants, would force it to introduce user verification checks, undermining their privacy. To avoid such a measure, Wikipedia had warned it could have to block millions of people in the UK from accessing the website with a 'quota-based' system, making it harder for British users to access the site when they wanted. In a judgment on Monday, Mr Justice Johnson said Wikipedia had failed to show the regulations, which cover large websites that allow user-generated posts, were 'flawed' or based on 'irrational' decisions by ministers and officials. The judge said officials were merely enforcing the Online Safety Act as written. 'The claimants have not identified any basic flaw in the logic or reasoning that Ofcom applied, and which officials approved, and the Secretary of State accepted,' the judgment said. The case did not rule, however, on whether Wikipedia should in fact be classed as a 'category one' service. Ofcom has yet to officially decide whether to include Wikipedia in the category. The judgment said such a decision would have to be 'justified as proportionate if it were not to amount to a breach of the right to freedom of expression' under the Human Rights Act. It added that any decision 'that has a significant impact on Wikipedia's ability to operate would, in the absence of justification, likely be unlawful'. Phil Bradley-Schmieg, a lawyer for Wikipedia, said: 'While the decision does not provide the immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped for, the court's ruling emphasised the responsibility of Ofcom and the UK Government to ensure Wikipedia is protected as the Online Safety Act is implemented.' Critics have warned the Online Safety Act is increasing censorship of the web, with social media sites blocking posts that could be judged as harmful to children. Elon Musk's X said the rules amounted to 'censorship' and that 'free speech will suffer' on the web. Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform, has called for the law to be repealed.