Playboy Fined £100,000 by UK Telecoms Watchdog

UK telecoms watchdog Ofcom has fined Playboy £100,000 for, 'failing to protect children' from pornographic material. Specifically, Ofcom says Playboy allowed users to access hardcore videos and pictures without having "acceptable controls" in place to verify all users were over 18. Playboy's Playboy TV and Demand Adult are both regulated by Ofcom and the Authority for Video On Demand (ATVOD) because they provide access to videos in a similar way to adult services broadcast on television and fall within UK jurisdiction. The regulator said in a statement today that Playboy's failure to prevent children from accessing the sites in question was 'serious, repeated and reckless.'

According to Ofcom, the only protection Demand Adult had in place was a button that said, "Enter I am over 18. In addition to this, users could use a debit card to pay for premium content. Playboy TV also had a self certification system in place for users' ages as well as a debit card payment system. Demand Adult displayed explicit content on the homepage, while Playboy TV showed sexual activity without explicit detail on its homepage.

For their actions, Demand Adult will have to pay £65,000 in fines, while Playboy TV will have to pay £35,000. This equates to just under $104,000 for Demand Adult and just under $56,000 for Playboy TV. Total fines equate to $159,929 by today's exchange rates.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Create a new thread in the US News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
16 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • Anonymous
    "'failing to protect children' from pornographic material" yeah, right. I started watching porn when I was 14 and loved every bit of it.
    I think children should be protected from being raised by stupid parents if anything. Being not sexually uneducated is a problem, being sexually irresponsible is a problem. Porn..... really isn't, so I guess what happened there is more about business and I'd really like to know who the money's going to...
    17
  • TheViper
    So they can just slap $100,000 fines for any adult website without a very strict age gate?

    Why are they not handing out thousands of these fines every day then?
    11
  • Other Comments
  • Anonymous
    "'failing to protect children' from pornographic material" yeah, right. I started watching porn when I was 14 and loved every bit of it.
    I think children should be protected from being raised by stupid parents if anything. Being not sexually uneducated is a problem, being sexually irresponsible is a problem. Porn..... really isn't, so I guess what happened there is more about business and I'd really like to know who the money's going to...
    17
  • TheViper
    So they can just slap $100,000 fines for any adult website without a very strict age gate?

    Why are they not handing out thousands of these fines every day then?
    11
  • gtvr
    TheViperSo they can just slap $100,000 fines for any adult website without a very strict age gate?Why are they not handing out thousands of these fines every day then?


    The best I could get from this story is that it has something to do with the distribution method. I suspect generic internet sites aren't covered.
    7