Technology

The law’s definition for operating system provider includes “general purpose computing device” so no, your toaster, microwave, and fridge are not included. (please remember that legal definitions do not always match how we would use the term in everyday conversation)

That does mean (by legal definitions in California) your toaster, microwave and fridge.

And really the choice of "pulling" support from areas with issue laws is the way, this law is not enforceable as written and is likely the easiest way for any OS to avoid legal issues. Just putting in a line that the OS is not supported in the state will not stop the OS being used but will stop legal issues from said state.

Didn't hear anything about it in Brazil. It's being done under the radar. Can't even find articles about it.

They will either give special permissions to relevant businesses (maybe an expensive Super Premium Golden Access), or use selective enforcement to only go after people/businesses that don't comply to their overall authoritarianism and pose too much of a risk to the status quo.

They don't care about the details they just want control.

OpenBSD did this because of cryptography laws and surprise surprise software written for it is now one of the vertebrae of our modern network stack

Gaming on BSD isn't as bad as you'd expect. There are Linux compatibility tools that let you run proton/wine on FreeBSD

Random shit breaks sometimes but once you get past the steep learning curve you can play a lot of titles

MidnightBSD chose to be out of Brazil, like it happened with Rumble. This law will be enforced.

If you live in Brazil and probably South America for some time, you'll know that it is hard to get hardware from Europe even from Ebay. It simply "does not ship to your destination". Now with the Mercosur + EU agreement that may be easier, but if software keeps leaving, the hardware and hardware culture won't be able to make up for it.

It's just software leaving the margins, and it will get worse if Google keeps pushing Android and Mobile culture further. Brazil may just become as corporate-centric as India.

Speaking as a brazilian resident, the law will not be enforced. No such laws are ever enforced here. Everybody openly pirates everything, people sell retro gaming systems preloaded with thousands of ROMs openly online and in physical shops, and the government doesn’t even have 1% of the surveillance infrastructure needed to make enforcement attractive. The law is just electoral posturing and lip service to please evangelical idiots… but I repeat myself.

The law will most likely be enforced where it matters: smartphones from companies that "manufacture" them in Brazil (which is like 90% of market share of smartphones in Brazil).

So both Android and iOS will most likely start requiring some official ID to be provided or facial recognition to setup the device and/or to access both Play Store or App Store, which yeah, seems a bit concerning.

Also, if you read the law: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2025/lei/L15211.htm, or in this PDF in English: https://www.gov.br/mdh/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/2025/novembro/brasil-apresenta-avancos-em-seguranca-digital-da-infancia-e-lanca-eca-digital-em-ingles-durante-cupula-social-do-g20-na-africa-do-sul/eca-digital-ing-v2.pdf?ref=itsfoss.com, you can see the only thing an operating system (that does not come with under 18 age improper content, like pornographic content, in it's installation media) really needs to implement is a self-declaration of being "age appropriate" to use the system, otherwise deny the installation of the OS.

Art. 12. Os provedores de lojas de aplicações de internet e de sistemas operacionais de terminais deverão:

I – tomar medidas proporcionais, auditáveis e tecnicamente seguras para aferir a idade ou a faixa etária dos usuários, observados os princípios previstos no art. 6º da Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018 (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais);

II – permitir que os pais ou responsáveis legais configurem mecanismos de supervisão parental voluntários e supervisionem, de forma ativa, o acesso de crianças e de adolescentes a aplicativos e conteúdos; e

III – possibilitar, por meio de Interface de Programação de Aplicações (Application Programming Interface – API) segura e pautada pela proteção da privacidade desde o padrão, o fornecimento de sinal de idade aos provedores de aplicações de internet, exclusivamente para o cumprimento das finalidades desta Lei e com salvaguardas técnicas adequadas.

§ 1º O fornecimento de sinal de idade por meio de APIs deverá observar o princípio da minimização de dados, vedado qualquer compartilhamento contínuo, automatizado e irrestrito de dados pessoais de crianças e de adolescentes.

§ 2º A autorização para download de aplicativos por crianças e adolescentes dependerá de consentimento livre e informado dos pais ou responsáveis legais, prestado nos termos da legislação vigente, respeitada a autonomia progressiva, vedada a presunção de autorização na hipótese de ausência de manifestação dos pais ou responsáveis legais.

§ 3º Ato do Poder Executivo regulamentará os requisitos mínimos de transparência, de segurança e de interoperabilidade para os mecanismos de aferição de idade e de supervisão parental adotados pelos sistemas operacionais e pelas lojas de aplicativos.

The part where the operating system must implement age verification is here:

Art. 12. Os provedores de lojas de aplicações de internet e de sistemas operacionais de terminais deverão:

I – tomar medidas proporcionais, auditáveis e tecnicamente seguras para aferir a idade ou a faixa etária dos usuários, observados os princípios previstos no art. 6º da Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018 (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais);

Which has been officially translated in the PDF to :

Art. 12. Providers of internet application stores and terminal operating systems shall:

I – take proportional, auditable, and technically secure measures to ascertain the age or age range of users, subject to the principles provided for in Art. 6 of Law No. 13,709, of August 14, 2018 (Brazilian Data Protection Law);

The II there, that states:

II – allow parents or legal guardians to configure voluntary parental supervision mechanisms and to actively supervise the access of children and adolescents to applications and content; and

Is totally optional, there's no way any judge in Brazil could enforce that as mandatory to be implemented in all OSes and punish any OS that denies installation for under 18 age citizens of Brazil and does not provide such parental supervision mechanisms.

Now, for any digital media or computer application that either contains or provides direct access to age restricted content from the internet I suppose article 9 applies:

Art. 9º Os fornecedores de produtos ou serviços de tecnologia da informação que disponibilizarem conteúdo, produto ou serviço cuja oferta ou acesso seja impróprio, inadequado ou proibido para menores de 18 (dezoito) anos de idade deverão adotar medidas eficazes para impedir o seu acesso por crianças e adolescentes no âmbito de seus serviços e produtos.

§ 1º Para dar efetividade ao disposto no caput, deverão ser adotados mecanismos confiáveis de verificação de idade a cada acesso do usuário ao conteúdo, produto ou serviço de que trata o caput deste artigo, vedada a autodeclaração.

§ 2º Para os fins desta Lei, consideram-se impróprios ou inadequados para crianças e adolescentes os produtos, serviços ou conteúdos de tecnologia da informação que contenham material pornográfico, ou quaisquer outros vedados pela legislação vigente.

§ 3º Os provedores de aplicações de internet que disponibilizarem conteúdo pornográfico deverão impedir a criação de contas ou de perfis por crianças e adolescentes no âmbito de seus serviços.

So, yeah, if you are providing an operating system that itself comes with any age restricted content as Brazilian law stipulates (such as pornographic content), I think self-reporting of age would be damned insufficient due to § 1º there:

Art. 9. Providers of information technology products or services that make available content, products, or services whose offer or access is improper, inadequate, or prohibited for persons under 18 (eighteen) years of age shall adopt effective measures to prevent their access by children and adolescents within the scope of their services and products.

§ 1. To effectuate the provision of the caput, reliable age verification mechanisms shall be adopted for each user access to the content, product, or service referred to in the caput of this article, with self-declaration being prohibited

If there's anything I'm missing here please point out.

The problem is, of course, if those evangelical idiots end up in power again they now have the power to wield it. (or to at least try)

This is different from pirating. The government will be going after the developers like they did Kim Dotcom.

Remember what the maintainer of The Pirate Bay once said?

Never be too certain something won't be enforced, as the power of capitalists are far worse than the public can imagine.

Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but this may just be the start. Big corps may find their way to control every aspect, step by step.

Australian legislation specifically notes that all sites must age challenge users connecting via a VPN