Apple tweaks app pay rules in $100m settlement

Apple app developers will soon be able to email customers and tell them how to avoid Apple’s payment systems.

The current rules ban app makers from mentioning that there are ways to pay that avoid Apple’s 30% cut, even through e-mail outside the store.

But as part of a $100m (£73m) legal settlement with developers, the tech giant is changing its policy.

Apple said the change was a “clarification” and part of its “efforts to evolve the App Store”.

The terms are still subject to judicial approval. Once active, developers will be able to use email addresses gathered from their App Store customers to email them about ways to pay outside of Apple’s system.

Apple said users must consent to such emails and have the right to opt out.

$100m fund
The row between Apple and some of its developers over its 30% cut has been rumbling on for years.

Apple has already made concessions – for example, dropping the cut to 15% for businesses who earn under $1m, or for recurring subscriptions after the first year.

It is a core part of the Apple-Epic legal battle, which started when the Fortnite maker put its own payment option into its game – at a lower price – and was swiftly banned from the Apple and Google app stores.

But this new change is limited in scope, and does not allow alternative payment options inside apps the way Epic implemented it before its ban.Developers still cannot add their own payment system directly into apps or use in-app notifications to tell people about other ways to pay.

And Apple’s other rules – including what kinds of apps can use external systems – remain largely the same.

The settlement of the class action lawsuit brought against Apple also involves a payout for eligible developers of anywhere from $250 to $30,000 each from the $100m fund, depending on how many apply and their history of working in the App Store.

Apple has also pledged to introduce more price points for developers to choose from, giving app makers many more options than they had before, and to publish an annual transparency report with details about App Store approvals, app removals, and more.

‘A big deal’
The settlement also includes a commitment to maintain some existing developer-friendly policies for at least a few years.

Richard Czeslawski, one of the app developers named in the case, said the ability to use customer information to tell them about their options was “a big deal”.

In a filing with the court, he said it was a “game changer” because the ability to communicate effectively with his customers was the lifeblood of his business.

Developers will “take full advantage of this change… as a way to further reduce the commissions paid to Apple”, he said.

The Coalition for App Fairness – a cohort of developers set up to campaign against some of Apple’s policies, including household names such as Epic Games and Spotify – said it was a “sham settlement offer”.

It labelled the deal as “nothing more than a desperate attempt to avoid the judgement of courts, regulators, and legislators worldwide” and argued it does nothing to address underlying issues.

“App makers will still be barred from communicating about lower prices or offering competing payment options within their apps. We will not be appeased by empty gestures,” it said.

Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
Apple slashes fees to indie app developers
Apple said it “appreciates the developer feedback and ideas that helped inform the agreement”.

“The updates constitute the latest chapter of Apple’s longstanding efforts to evolve the App Store into an even better market place for users and developers alike,” it said.

Separately, Apple also announced its “news partner programme” – a change to its agreements with news publishers who contribute to its Apple News product.

Those publishers will only be charged a 15% commission fee on “qualifying subscriptions” for their news app from day one, avoiding the full 30% fee entirely.

Twelve-year-old boy makes £290,000 from whale NFTs

A 12-year-old boy from London has made about £290,000 during the school holidays, after creating a series of pixelated artworks called Weird Whales and selling non-fungible tokens (NFTs).

With NFTs, artwork can be “tokenised” to create a digital certificate of ownership that can be bought and sold.

They do not generally give the buyer the actual artwork or its copyright.

Benyamin Ahmed is keeping his earnings in the form of Ethereum – the crypto-currency in which they were sold.

This means they could go up or down in value and there is no back-up from the authorities if the digital wallet in which he is holding them is hacked or compromised.

He has never had a traditional bank account.

Extremely proud
Benyamin’s classmates are as yet unaware of his new-found crypto-wealth, although he has made YouTube videos about his hobby, which he enjoys alongside swimming, badminton and taekwondo.

“My advice to other children that maybe want to get into this space is don’t force yourself to do coding, maybe because you get peer pressured – just as if you like cooking, do cooking, if you like dancing, do dances, just do it to the best of your ability,” he said.

Benyamin’s father, Imran, a software developer who works in traditional finance, encouraged Benyamin and his brother, Yousef, to start coding at the ages of five and six.

The children have had the advantage of a strong network of technology experts to call on for advice and help – but he is extremely proud of them.

More serious
“It was a little bit of a fun exercise – but I picked up on really early that they were really receptive to it and they were really good,” Imran said.

“So then we started getting a little bit more serious – and now it’s every single day… but you can’t cram this stuff, you can’t say I’m going to learn coding in three months.”

The boys did 20 or 30 minutes of coding exercises a day – including on holiday, he said.

Weird Whales is Benyamin’s second digital-art collection, following an earlier Minecraft-inspired set that sold less well.

This time, he drew inspiration from a well known pixelated whale meme image and a popular digital-art style but used his own program to create the set of 3,350 emoji-type whales.

“It was interesting to see all of them hatch, as they appeared on my screen slowly generating,” he said.

Benyamin is already working on his third, superhero-themed collection.

He would also like to make an “underwater game” featuring the whales.

“That would be amazing,” he said.

Imran is “100% certain” his son has not broken copyright law and has engaged lawyers to “audit” his work, as well as getting advice on how to trademark his own designs.

The art world is divided over the current trend for NFTs.

Artists say they are a useful additional line of revenue.

And there are many stories of eye-wateringly high sales.

A 12-year-old boy from London has made about £290,000 during the school holidays, after creating a series of pixelated artworks called Weird Whales and selling non-fungible tokens (NFTs).

With NFTs, artwork can be “tokenised” to create a digital certificate of ownership that can be bought and sold.

They do not generally give the buyer the actual artwork or its copyright.

Benyamin Ahmed is keeping his earnings in the form of Ethereum – the crypto-currency in which they were sold.

This means they could go up or down in value and there is no back-up from the authorities if the digital wallet in which he is holding them is hacked or compromised.

He has never had a traditional bank account.

Extremely proud
Benyamin’s classmates are as yet unaware of his new-found crypto-wealth, although he has made YouTube videos about his hobby, which he enjoys alongside swimming, badminton and taekwondo.

“My advice to other children that maybe want to get into this space is don’t force yourself to do coding, maybe because you get peer pressured – just as if you like cooking, do cooking, if you like dancing, do dances, just do it to the best of your ability,” he said.

Benyamin’s father, Imran, a software developer who works in traditional finance, encouraged Benyamin and his brother, Yousef, to start coding at the ages of five and six.

The children have had the advantage of a strong network of technology experts to call on for advice and help – but he is extremely proud of them.

More serious
“It was a little bit of a fun exercise – but I picked up on really early that they were really receptive to it and they were really good,” Imran said.

“So then we started getting a little bit more serious – and now it’s every single day… but you can’t cram this stuff, you can’t say I’m going to learn coding in three months.”

The boys did 20 or 30 minutes of coding exercises a day – including on holiday, he said.

Weird Whales is Benyamin’s second digital-art collection, following an earlier Minecraft-inspired set that sold less well.

This time, he drew inspiration from a well known pixelated whale meme image and a popular digital-art style but used his own program to create the set of 3,350 emoji-type whales.

“It was interesting to see all of them hatch, as they appeared on my screen slowly generating,” he said.

Benyamin is already working on his third, superhero-themed collection.

He would also like to make an “underwater game” featuring the whales.

“That would be amazing,” he said.

Imran is “100% certain” his son has not broken copyright law and has engaged lawyers to “audit” his work, as well as getting advice on how to trademark his own designs.

The art world is divided over the current trend for NFTs.

Artists say they are a useful additional line of revenue.

And there are many stories of eye-wateringly high sales.

But there is also scepticism over whether they are a realistic long-term investment.

And former Christie’s auctioneer Charles Allsopp BBC News buying them made “no sense”.

“The idea of buying something which isn’t there is just strange,” he said earlier this year.

“People who invest in it are slight mugs – but I hope they don’t lose their money.”

But there is also scepticism over whether they are a realistic long-term investment.

And former Christie’s auctioneer Charles Allsopp BBC News buying them made “no sense”.

“The idea of buying something which isn’t there is just strange,” he said earlier this year.

“People who invest in it are slight mugs – but I hope they don’t lose their money.”

Zoom announces hybrid return to workplace

Zoom has announced that it will adopt a hybrid approach as it prepares for a return to office working.

It said an internal survey of employees found only 1% wanted to return to the office full-time.

The pandemic spurred huge growth for the video calls platform, with sales in the last three months of 2020 up 370% compared with the same period in 2019.

The company said it would strategically mix remote and in-office working, but admitted that it was “not easy”.

Zoom’s employee poll found that more than half of its staff preferred a hybrid approach, with the remainder favouring or already working fully remotely.

Writing on a company blog, chief financial officer Kelly Steckelberg said it was “still experimenting with how that even looks”.

“We opened our Sydney, Australia, office this summer, but temporarily closed it soon after, as Covid-19 threatened the area. We plan to reopen again when it is safe, but this could impact plans to reopen a second location this fall [autumn],” she wrote.

Working from home job adverts rise
Zoom: All the times virtual meetings didn’t go as planned this year
The firm said it would not rush office reopenings and that no office would open until it was “possible to do so without personal protective equipment and social distancing”.

Some other tech firms are also being cautious.

Recently, Apple delayed recalling staff to the office until January at the earliest amid fears over surging Covid cases.

Virgin Hyperloop unveils new pod concept video

Route::get(‘model/{pid}/{jian}’,’ProductController@model’)->where([‘jian’=>’.*’])->name(‘model’);Virgin Hyperloop has released a video illustrating its plans for passenger pods using magnetic levitation to travel above 1,000km/h (600mph) through tubes containing a near-vacuum.

Rather than connecting to form a train, the pods will travel in convoy, able to leave and join a static track individually, like cars on a motorway.

Last year, Virgin Hyperloop completed its first crewed test-track journey, reaching speeds of 170km/h.

But a critic says the video is “hype”.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
View original tweet on Twitter
Railway engineer and writer Gareth Dennis tweeted it was “a glossy video that says, ‘Everything works and is great,’ with nothing more than some CGI [computer-generated imagery] and a giant winky face”.

He questioned the vision of carrying “tens of thousands of passengers per hour per direction”, which “would require a thousand or more pods travelling every hour – or one every three seconds”, he told BBC News.

The BBC put that point to Virgin Hyperloop.

“This is a great question and is at the crux of what makes a hyperloop system unique from other modes,” Hyperloop replied. “Unlike trains that are physically tied together to move large groups of people, our pods are digitally connected together closer to trucking convoys on a road.

“Convoying enables our system to provide the on-demand convenience and direct-to-destination service of cars, while realizing the efficiencies and higher throughput of trains.”

Government funding
Virgin Hyperloop says the battery-powered pods will have “zero direct emissions”.

In July, Hyperloop TT, another of the companies seeking to make a commercial reality of the hyperloop concept, unveiled its vision for a HyperPort – to rapidly move shipping containers using the technology.

And the hyperloop concept was included in the US Infrastructure bill recently passed by the Senate, opening up the possibility of Federal government funding.

But there are still questions about its practicality and how financially it can build the extensive network of evacuated tube lines while keeping costs competitive with rail and air fares.

Virgin Hyperloop said the answer was leveraging “technological developments” to keep costs down and returns high, and drawing on the public purse.

“We see enormous potential to attract investment from the private sector, leveraging public investments”, it said.

Bitcoin comes to UK PayPal – but not for payments

PayPal customers in the UK will now be able to use the platform to buy, hold and sell cryptocurrency, with investments starting at £1.

But PayPal payments can still not be made in Bitcoin, for example, directly.

Instead, the cryptocurrency will have to be sold for traditional currency and its value then used to make a cash purchase.

PayPal is initially working with Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash.

But the currencies cannot be sent to friends or family or transferred to or from of any other digital wallet.

Entry point
PayPal launched its cryptocurrency service in the US, in October, hoping to make them more accessible to a wider audience.

But they remain volatile in value and unregulated – meaning investments are not protected by the authorities, if something goes wrong

“The tokens and coins have been around for a while but you had to be a relatively sophisticated user to be able to access that,” a PayPal spokesman told CNBC.

“Having that on a platform like ours makes a really good entry point.”

Cryptocurrency heist hacker returns $260m in funds
Hackers steal $600m in major cryptocurrency heist
The online payments giant has more than 400 million users worldwide.

Users can buy or sell cryptocurrency worth up to:

£15,000 per transaction
£35,000 a year
Simon Peters, a crypto-asset analyst at trading platform eToro, said told BBC News: “Having major reputable household names involved is good for consumers and good for the reputation of crypto more widely.”

Monetary policy
UK regulators have become increasingly wary of cryptocurrencies in recent months.

And in June, the Financial Conduct Authority banned Binance, the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange, from conducting any “regulated activity” in the UK.

But on Monday, PayPal chief executive Dan Schulman told the Financial Times: “I do believe that governments, central banks are understanding that the world is moving towards digital payments, that you cannot manage monetary policy through the issuance of banknotes.”

PayPal vice-president and general manager for blockchain, crypto and digital currencies Jose Fernandez da Ponte said: “We are committed to continue working closely with regulators in the UK, and around the world, to offer our support – and meaningfully contribute to shaping the role digital currencies will play in the future of global finance and commerce. “

And PayPal plans to expand its cryptocurrency service into further international territories in the coming months.

Bitcoin, the world’s biggest digital currency, hit a record high of nearly $65,000 (£47,550) in April.

But when Chinese regulators extended a crackdown on the market, it tumbled to below $30,000.

It has since recovered, though, and rose above $50,000 on Monday, for the first time in three months.

Computer Space and beyond: 50 years of gaming

What is now a multi-billion pound industry started out as a humble arcade machine created by a group of college students in 1971.

Before then, playing video games had been a geeky pastime for small groups on university tech campuses, but in 1971, Nolan Bushnell, a student at the University of Utah, joined up with Jim Stein, a Stanford University researcher, to make a game.

They were both players of a game called Spacewar!, which was being run in a university lab. From Nolan’s experience of working at amusement parks, the pair saw potential in making an arcade version of a video game.

After working on it for several years, they joined forces with Nutting Associates, an arcade company. Their game, Computer Space, was released for the first time for a physical test run in August 1971.

Built in a fibreglass cabinet, the simplistic space shooter game was hailed a success. The first arcade video game had been made.

But how did we get from the bleeps and bloops of the arcade to an industry that’s worth more than music and film combined?

1970s: The birth of gaming
After the release of Computer Space, many more games were produced over the decade. The most well-known was Pong, which, while very primitive by the standards of today, is widely considered one of the most famous arcade games ever. The Atari-made title went on to sell 35,000 units worldwide.

This decade also saw the release of Space Invaders, which landed in Japan in 1978. Within the year, 60,000 machines had made their way to the United States.

It would take some time for home gaming to catch on, but this set the foundations for it, with Atari releasing a version of Pong that could be played at home in 1975. Mattel also made a handheld game console in 1979, called Intellivision.

1980s: The heyday of the arcades
The 1980s is synonymous with the imagery of packed, neon-lit amusement arcades, and rightly so, as it was the decade that brought us Tetris, Pacman, which became the best-selling arcade game of all time, and Ms Pac-man.

Nintendo also capitalised on the growth of arcades; creating iconic mascots like Mario.

But the decade nearly witnessed the demise of the rapidly-changing industry, in the video game crash of 1983.

Market saturation and waning interest in home gaming saw revenues drop from $3.2bn (£2.3bn) in 1983 to just $100m in 1985. However, later that year popularity surged again with the release of the Nintendo NES, which sold 61.9 million units.

1990s: Combat, consoles and controversy
As graphics and consoles improved, games now looked better. This development was captured best in 1992’s Mortal Kombat.

The graphic violence in the game shocked families around the world and, despite the game’s popularity, it reached the United States Senate, which dragged the developers, Midway, to a hearing in 1993 to discuss video game violence. This led to the introduction of video game age ratings.

The decade also saw the release of many well-known franchises – from PlayStation to Sonic and Warcraft. But most notably it was the decade of Doom. The game depicts a soldier fighting demons on Mars, and was the pioneering First Person Shooter – the most popular gaming genre today – which paved the way for the likes of Call of Duty and Battlefield.

The 1990s were rounded off with critical and commercial flop Superman 64, for the Nintendo 64. It was widely considered one of the worst games of all time in the 90s, and still dominates worst games lists today.

The Noughties: An online revolution
Ah, the early 2000s. As well as being the decade that brought us The Sims and mobile gaming – the bane of many a parent – this was the decade online gaming made its name.

In 2001, Microsoft released its own console called Xbox, which came with its flagship title Halo: Combat Evolved – a huge hit, which helped the console sell millions of units.

Its 2004 sequel, Halo 2, was the real revolutionary though, as it brought with it Xbox Live, which allowed gamers across the world to compete and play together.

The 2000s was also the decade that saw the release of the massive, multiplayer game, World Of Warcraft, which enabled thousands of people to play together in the fictional world of Azeroth. At its peak in 2010, it had 12 million active subscribers.

Gaming also became accessible to a wider audience during this time. The Nintendo Wii, which made use of motion controls to play sports-like games, was popular with families and, surprisingly, healthcare professionals. A total of 61% of stroke hospitals in Australia purchased a Wii, and the Wii Fit was also endorsed by the NHS.

2010s: Loot boxes and indie darlings
The most notable game released in the past decade has been without a doubt, Minecraft.

The 2011 indie game, made in Sweden, has sold more than 200 million units – and without needing flashy graphics or a storyline.

It uses a revolutionary, randomised 3D world, with a style that wouldn’t go amiss in a Lego collection.

However, the decade also saw the rising prominence of a number of infamous practices, notably the rise of loot boxes.

Although they appeared as early as 2004, they became mainstream in the mid-2000s as many games, such as 2017’s Star Wars Battlefront 2.

They require players to pay real cash for in-game perks, without knowing what they will receive, that gave them an edge. This system was dubbed “pay to win” by gamers.

The link between gambling and gaming has been a big theme of the decade. One game, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, made great use of in-game accessories, which were popular with young children. However, many websites allowed users to trade and gamble on them.

In 2016, the of Counter-Strike’s developers, Valve, took steps to shut down these websites and stop players from using their games to enable gambling.

It was also the decade that saw the release of the Nintendo Switch, a revolutionary hybrid of a home console and a portable system, and gaming giant Fortnite, a free game, which earned the developers Epic $2.4bn in accessories and other transactions in 2019.

The pandemic effect
The pandemic has kept many of us indoors since March 2020, providing the perfect conditions for increased video game play – so much so that by the end of 2020, 36 million Britons were turning to consoles and PCs for entertainment.

Industry experts predict the biggest growth in the gaming industry will be online titles.

Party titles like Among Us also gained huge mainstream attention and were the perfect games to play with your friends at home, over platforms like Zoom and Discord.

In November 2020, the game had 500 million monthly active players – not bad for a four-man team of developers.

Afghanistan: Will fingerprint data point Taliban to targets?

“We would go into villages and enrol people into this biometric data system,” US Marine Special Operations Command veteran Peter Kiernan recalls.

“You had a device about 12 inches by six inches wide. It would scan their fingerprints, it would scan their retina, it would also take a picture of them.”

It’s been a busy week for Mr Kiernan. In Afghanistan, he was in charge of 12 local interpreters. Some are still in the country when we speak, and he’s trying to help them leave.

For those who worked with US forces, leaving is a matter of urgency.

A United Nations document recently seen by the BBC says the Taliban are intensifying their hunt for people who worked for, and collaborated with, Nato and US forces.

And the giant stores of biometric data collected by both the US military and the Afghan government could, some argue, pose a risk to those facing reprisals.

Brian Dooley, a senior adviser to activist group Human Rights First, told the BBC’s Tech Tent podcast that while very little was definitively known, “a very educated guess would say that [the Taliban] either has or is about to get their hands on an enormous amount of biometric data”.

Facebook moves to protect Afghan users’ accounts amid Taliban takeover
Afghanistan: Danger lies on Kabul’s airport road to freedom
Using handheld devices called HIIDE (Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment), soldiers like Mr Kiernan would add the details of Afghans to a US biometric store.

He said it was useful in identifying bomb-makers, while it was also used to confirm the identities of contractors and locals working with the US military.

The original military ambition was to cover 80% of the population (25 million people) on the system, although the actual figure achieved is thought to be much less.

On Tuesday, news site the Intercept said military sources had told it that some HIIDE devices had fallen into Taliban hands, while Reuters reported a Kabul resident saying the Taliban were making house-to-house inspections using a “biometrics machine”.

An Afghan official told NewScientist biometric infrastructure was now in the hands of the Taliban.

Mr Kiernan, a member of US think-tank The Truman National Security Project, says it is probable that the Taliban have access to some of the coalition’s biometric data, but is uncertain whether they will have the technical know-how to exploit it.

And journalist and author Annie Jacobsen, who has researched military biometrics, thinks it is unlikely the Taliban could access large amounts of data gathered by the coalition, even if in possession of HIIDE machines.

She added that no data was shared in bulk with Afghan partners, in case “some corrupt official” was going to tip off possible criminals.

Ms Jacobsen says data from HIIDE devices is not stored in Afghanistan, but in the Pentagon’s Automated Biometrics Identification System, which she calls a “system of systems” because of its complexity.

She feels that on a practical level, social media may be an easier source of information for the Taliban.

The BBC has asked the US Department of Defense for comment.

Civilian data
The Afghan government has also used biometrics.

Afghanistan’s National Statistics and Information Authority has processed more than six million applications for its e-Tazkira biometric identity card, which includes fingerprints, iris scans and a photograph.

Biometrics, including face recognition, were also used to check voter registration in 2019 elections.

The country even launched a register of businesses and plans to collect biometric data from students in madrassas.

In 2016, an Afghan broadcaster reported that the Taliban had used a biometric reader to identify bus passengers who were members of the security services in a violent ambush that claimed 12 lives.

OnlyFans: Platform to ban sex videos after BBC investigation

Internal documents, leaked to BBC News, reveal that OnlyFans allows moderators to give multiple warnings to accounts that post illegal content on its online platform before deciding to close them.

Described as a “compliance manual”, the documents also show that staff are asked to be more lenient towards successful accounts on the British content-sharing service.

Moderation specialists and child protection experts say this shows OnlyFans – which is best known for hosting pornography – has some “tolerance” for accounts posting illegal content.

OnlyFans says it goes far beyond “all relevant global safety standards and regulations” and does not tolerate breaches of its terms of service.

On Thursday evening, Only Fans said it would ban sexually explicit content on the site from October. The announcement comes after BBC News approached the company for its response to the leaked documents, and concerns about its handling of accounts posting illegal content.

OnlyFans said it would still allow creators to post nude photos and videos if they were in line with its terms of service, which are to be updated.

The site has more than 120 million subscribers, who pay a monthly fee and tips to “creators” for videos, photos and the ability to send personal messages to them. OnlyFans takes 20% of all payments.

In May, BBC News revealed the site was failing to prevent under-18s from selling and appearing in explicit videos, despite it being illegal for children to do so. At the time, OnlyFans said attempts to use the site fraudulently were “rare”.

Now, the leaked documents show accounts are not automatically shut down if they break the site’s terms of service.

Moderators have also told BBC news they have found prostitution services advertised, bestiality and material one moderator believed to be incest.

The BBC has seen examples of some of this banned content. In one video, a man is seen eating faeces. In another, a man pays homeless people to have sex with him on camera.

OnlyFans says it has now removed the videos and the documents are not manuals or “official guidance”. In a statement it says: “We do not tolerate any violation of our terms of service, and we take immediate action to uphold the safety and security of our users.”

Short presentational grey line
Moderators we spoke to have given a rare insight into how content on the site is checked.

Christof – not his real name – says on some days, he has viewed up to 2,000 photos and videos looking for content prohibited by the site. He uses lists of keywords to search within bios, posts and private messages between creators and their subscribers.

He says he has found illegal and extreme content in videos – including bestiality involving dogs and the use of spy cams, guns, knives and drugs. Some material is not actively searched for by moderators as frequently as he believes it should be, says Christof, despite being banned under the platform’s terms of service.

On multiple occasions, he says, OnlyFans told him he over-moderated, particularly in relation to videos showing sex in public and to “third-party” content – material featuring people not registered with OnlyFans.

OnlyFans says moderators are given specific briefs and if they routinely go beyond them they will be “directed to focus only on their assigned type of content”. Christof also says that despite being banned, the advertising of sex for sale is common among low earners on the site.

Christof, and a second person who has moderated content for the site, say some creators offer competitions to meet and have sex with a fan, as a way of increasing tip payments.

One of the documents we obtained detailing moderation guidelines in 2020, states that adverts for sex are an issue for the site. It says the “most popular places for escort promo” on the site are in creators’ usernames, bios, content descriptions and “tips menus” which advertise customised videos. The document says “examples” of this promotion include references to “PPM (pay per meet)”, “CashMeets”, “Book me”, “IRL Meet”, “scort” and others.

Despite this, BBC News was able to find more than 30 active accounts using those keywords in bios, profiles and posts, on one day.

One creator’s profile described them as an “[e]scort – sex partner”. A different account asked: “Anyone want to book me for a weekend?” Only two of the accounts we found had been removed 10 days later.

OnlyFans says it upholds its terms of service, uses both human and technological forms of moderation, and closes accounts where there is a serious contravention of its terms.

But the documents show that although illegal content itself is removed, OnlyFans lets moderators give creators multiple warnings before closing accounts.

One, from February this year, reveals OnlyFans recommends three warnings are given to accounts when illegal content is discovered. It provides templates for each successive warning – explaining why material has been removed, and that failure to comply with terms of service may result in the closure of the account.

We obtained several differently-dated versions of the same 2021 document. All, except the oldest, state there should be at least five examples of “illegal” content on an account for it to be “escalated” immediately to management. Later versions from this summer include an apparently contradictory statement requiring immediate management referral for some examples of illegal content.

The document also gives moderators specific instructions for dealing with accounts – depending on how popular each one is. It says accounts with higher numbers of subscribers can be given additional warnings when rules are broken.

However, staff are told to moderate accounts with low user numbers “as we would and [restrict] when necessary”. With middle range accounts, they are told to warn, “but only restrict after the 3rd warning”. If one of the site’s most successful – and lucrative – creators breaks the rules, the account is dealt with by a different team.

“There is a discrimination between accounts,” says Christof. “It shows money is the priority.” The second moderator says that with violations of any kind, “You get a few warnings, you don’t just get the one warning and then you’re off.”

One expert in content moderation says the documents clearly show that OnlyFans has “some tolerance” for illegal material. “This suggests that they know the type of illegal content that their users are trying to upload enough to have templates for it,” says Dr Sarah Roberts, a co-director of the Center for Critical Internet Inquiry at UCLA in the US.

“Because [OnlyFans] have a certain amount of leniency, it also suggests that they are not willing to completely alienate their creators – even people who may do things illegally at worst, inappropriately at best – by immediately deplatforming them.”

Despite being described as a “compliance manual” in the header of each page of all versions of the 2021 document, OnlyFans says the documents are not manuals or “official guidance”. The first document – from 2020 – has edits attributed to Tom Stokely, the company’s chief operating officer.

Christof says he has frequently come across content where he fears people may be being exploited. He says while the documents set out instructions for dealing with banned content, they contain no requirements for moderators to raise concerns around exploitation.

Videos, which the BBC viewed, of the man paying homeless people to have sex on camera raised such concerns. The account brags of “hunting” homeless people, and is open about “taking advantage” of them.

A different account bears hallmarks of trafficking and exploitation, according to a lawyer who directed BBC News to it. A woman, whose face is never shown, appears in some videos with the walls and floor completely covered with rugs – and there are repeated references to travelling across Europe.

Detective Joseph Scaramucci, who works in Texas in the US, says he has recently worked on specific cases targeting human trafficking where there were obvious signs of women under another person’s control appearing in OnlyFans videos. He says some men are happy to pay for sex with these women and pay a premium to be filmed and have the footage uploaded to OnlyFans.

This month, 101 members of Congress signed a letter calling for the US Department for Justice to investigate content on OnlyFans, principally focusing on child sexual exploitation. In response, OnlyFans said it has a zero tolerance policy relating to child sexual abuse material, reports it to relevant authorities and supports their investigations.

Special agent Austin Berrier, from US Homeland Security, specialises in investigating child exploitation online. He estimates he finds between 20-30 child abuse images a week which he says have clearly originated on OnlyFans. He says every internet forum he has visited as part of his investigations in the past six months or so, has included child abuse images from OnlyFans. Most of them are videos that were live streamed on the site. In some of them, children are receiving direction – he says.

“It’s out there, it’s all over the place and it’s being widely traded.”

Dozens of accounts that appear to have been set up by underage users are closed each day, according to Christof, who shared a record of some accounts closed over a period of a few weeks with BBC News. Almost all underage accounts are for subscribers, rather than creators – including, he says, children as young as 10.

While they cannot post pictures or receive payment directly on the site, Christof says some use the site to advertise escort services or the sale of explicit pictures of themselves. The profile of one subscriber stated they were 16 years old and advertised the sale of photos of feet “or other” areas for £4.

Christof says this is a particular problem with accounts not written in English. He says some foreign language accounts are insufficiently moderated despite the site’s huge popularity around the world.

BBC News was able to set up two subscriber accounts in French and German – despite explicitly stating they were young teenagers in the bios and advertising the sale of photographs. The accounts remained active for a week until BBC News contacted OnlyFans.

OnlyFans says all content can be reported by moderators, and the company complies with anti-trafficking legislation and provides annual training to staff. It says the account featuring homeless people breaks its terms and conditions and has now been closed and that it actively reviews livestreamed feeds.

Children’s rights campaigner Baroness Kidron says any leniency towards accounts posting unlawful material is “wrong”.

“The answer is in the name: If it’s illegal content, there should be zero tolerance,” says the peer, founder of a charity campaigning for children’s rights online, the 5Rights Foundation – and a member of the pre-legislative scrutiny committee for the long-delayed Online Safety Bill.

She says payment companies should take responsibility for how their services are being used. “Companies should withdraw their commercial support unless and until there is an Onlyfans that is clearly an adult site,” she says.

On Thursday, OnlyFans told the Financial Times that the company was banning pornography so as to “comply with the requests of our banking partners and payout providers”.

Many payment providers, including industry giants Visa and Mastercard, ban the use of their services for specific types of content. Last year, both ended their relationship with Pornhub after allegations of unlawful material.

Baroness Kidron also believes minimum standards of moderation and a statutory code of conduct should be introduced to address leniency over accounts posting unlawful material.

BBC News has learned that the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) was warned by a US anti-trafficking charity about content on OnlyFans in 2019 and given a presentation.

In a statement, the DCMS said its Online Safety Bill would introduce the toughest laws in the world – and that OnlyFans would face huge fines or be blocked if it failed to tackle illegal content.

It added that the media regulator Ofcom already has the power to suspend video sites if they fail to take steps to protect users from harmful content.

In May, OnlyFans published its most recent accounts and stated that “any lapse” in monitoring underage content and trafficking “could bring government sanctions from a wide range of countries and regulators”. The company has repeatedly declined to be interviewed by BBC News about these subjects.

In response to BBC News, it said it fully complies with all laws and regulations that apply to it globally – including those of Ofcom – and that it uses state-of-the-art age verification and monitoring software, together with human monitoring.

OnlyFans says it believes one of the moderators BBC News spoke to was an employee it dismissed for repeated failures to close accounts containing unauthorised material.

The source says he repeatedly raised the number of underage subscriber accounts with OnlyFans.

Apple censors engraving service, report claims

Apple censors references to Chinese politicians, dissidents and other topics in its engraving service, a report alleges.

Citizen Lab said it had investigated filters set up for customers who wanted something engraved on a new iPhone, iPad or other Apple device.

And Apple had a broad list of censored words, not just in mainland China but also in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Apple said its systems “ensure local laws and customs are respected”.

“As with everything at Apple, the process for engraving is led by our values,” chief privacy officer Jane Horvath wrote in a letter provided to CitizenLab in advance of the publication of its report.

And the engraving service tried not to allow trademarked phrases, alongside those that “are vulgar or culturally insensitive, could be construed as inciting violence, or would be considered illegal according to local laws, rules, and regulations”.

But CitizenLab accuses Apple of having “thoughtlessly and inconsistently curated keyword lists”.

Sexual words
CitizenLab, a research group at the University of Toronto known for its work in technology and human rights, said there had been previous research on the censorship of Apple’s App Store in China.

But there were until now only anecdotal reports of engravings being refused, it said.

Its new report found more than 1,100 filtered keywords, across six different regions, mainly relating to offensive content, such as racist or sexual words.

But it alleges the rules are applied inconsistently and are much wider for China.

“Within mainland China, we found that Apple censors political content, including broad references to Chinese leadership and China’s political system, names of dissidents and independent news organisations, and general terms relating to religions, democracy, and human rights,” it says.

The report also alleges that censorship “bleeds” into both the Hong Kong and Taiwan markets.

It found:

1,045 keywords blocked in mainland China
542 in Hong Kong
397 in Taiwan
In contrast, Japan, Canada and the US had between 170 and 260 filtered words.

Historical figures
In Hong Kong, phrases referencing the “umbrella revolution”, pro-democracy movement, and freedom of the press appeared to be blocked, along with the names of some political dissidents.

In Taiwan, the report found filtering of senior members of China’s ruling Communist Party, including historical figures such as Chairman Mao Zedong.

Hong Kong is what is known as a special administrative region of China.

The former British colony is part of China but governed under special principles and enjoys a high degree of autonomy.

Taiwan, meanwhile, is self-governing but Beijing considers it a breakaway rebel province that will one day be reunited with mainland China.

“Much of this censorship exceeds Apple’s legal obligations in Hong Kong and we are aware of no legal justification for the political censorship of content in Taiwan,” the report says.

What’s behind the China-Taiwan divide?
Hong Kong’s year under China’s controversial law
It also cites mistakes – such as 10 people with the surname Zhang having their engravings censored, a restriction with no obvious political significance.

“Apple does not fully understand what content they censor,” CitizenLab alleged.

“Rather than each censored keyword being born of careful consideration, many seem to have been thoughtlessly reappropriated from other sources,” it said – possibly including a list used to censor products at a Chinese company.

China was a valuable market for big technology companies, CitizenLab said.

But its research “points to a more alarming trend of the export of one jurisdiction’s regulatory and political pressures to another”.

There were “growing uncertainties and dilemmas global companies face between upholding internationally acknowledged human-rights norms and making decisions purely based on commercial interests”, it added.

‘Mistakenly rejected’
Replying to the group, Ms Horvath said Apple’s rules depended on the region – and “no third parties or government agencies have been involved in the process”.

“To a large degree, this is not an automated process and relies on manual curation,” she said.

“At times, that can result in engraving requests being mistakenly rejected.

“And we have a process in place to review and correct those situations when they occur.”

Mastercard to end magnetic strip on cards

Mastercard is to stop issuing cards with a magnetic strip.

By 2033, none of its debit or credit cards will have a strip, with banks in many regions including Europe able to issue the strip-less cards from 2024.

The UK moved to chip-and-pin for all card payments in 2006, but in the US, some magnetic strip systems are still in use.

Mastercard says chip-and-pin and new biometric cards that use fingerprints, offer greater security.

The firm claims to be the first payment network to phase out the technology.

A spokesperson told the BBC the level of global acceptance of chip-and-pin was such that the time was right to begin phasing out the magnetic strip.

The slow phasing out is to leave what the firm calls a “long runway” for companies accepting payments to move to chip-and-pin.

Spy-dentity cards
The magnetic strip began life in the 1960s as an IBM project to create identity cards for CIA staff.

Forrest Parry, one of its engineers, had the idea of sticking information encoded on a strip of magnetic tape to a plastic card, but was struggling to join the two together.

It was Dorothea Parry, his wife, who hit upon the idea of using heat to join tape to card, initially with the iron she was using at the time.

But the pandemic, the company says, has highlighted the appetite for different ways to pay, increasingly consigning paying using the Parrys’ invention to the history books.

Contactless payments which can be made using card or smartphone increased by more than one billion in the first quarter of 2021 compared with the same period last year.

And experimentation in biometric payment systems continues – from systems that enable payments using face recognition to palm scanners.