Introduction: The Era of Digital Responsibility by Design
The Regulatory Tipping Point
We live in an era where a child's click lights up not only screens but also complex regulatory responsibilities. The enactment of Law 15.211/2025, dubbed the "Digital ECA," marks the dawn of a new era. This article explores the ECA Digital and the new legal architecture that it establishes. It is a system specifically designed to protect minors in the digital environment. This milestone is not an isolated phenomenon; on the contrary, it represents the materialization of a global paradigm in full consolidation. The era of self-regulation in the technology industry, marked by promises and reactive responses to harms already occurred, has come to an end. In its place emerges a legal mandate for proactive, design-informed security (safety by design).
Robust international legislation has already signaled this fundamental transition. Good examples are thehttps://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50) of the United Kingdom and the(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng) of the European Union. They move away from reactive “notice and remove” regimes to a model based on proactive duties of care. Brazil, with the Digital ECA, aligns itself with this vanguard, consolidating trends from previous projects, such as PL 2.628/2022. Therefore, the new law crystallizes a loss of confidence in the industry's ability to self-regulate. It codifies a new corporate responsibility, rooted not only in data breaches but also in predictable psychological and developmental harm inherent in the design of digital products.
Presentation of Law 15.21Presentation of Law 15.211/2025 (“ECA Digital”)
We must understand the Digital ECA as a foundational piece of legislation. It redefines the social contract between technology providers and children and young people in Brazil. The law not only complements but also modernizes and expands the Child and Adolescent Statute (Law 8.069/1990) for the digital world, creating a specific and detailed legal framework. Furthermore, the law unifies principles already debated in Congress under a coherent framework. This includes the protection of early childhood. and the regulation of the work of young digital influencers.
The Central Challenge: From Reaction to Reinvention
For digital law, education, and technology professionals, the challenge of the Digital ECA goes beyond mere adaptation. Compliance is now a principle that must guide product design from the outset. Consequently, the law forces a shift in mindset. It replaces the question "Is this legal?" with "Is this in the best interests of the child?" This is an invitation for the legal-technological community to lead the reinvention of digital ecosystems. Now, the principle of privacy by design, already enshrined in (https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/lei/l13709.htm) , extends to a broader concept of safety by design. This approach is aligned with guidelines from organizations such as (https://www.oecd.org/) and the UNICEF. The invitation is to innovate responsibly, redesigning the digital future with the protection of minors as its cornerstone. To help, we've prepared a Practical checklist for compliance in edtechs at the end of this article.
Part I: Anatomy of the Digital ECA and the New Legal Architecture
Overview of the Law: Scope and Definitions
The effectiveness of ECA Digital and the new legal architecture what it inaugurates lies in its breadth. Its precise definitions seek to close the loopholes exploited under older regulatory regimes.
Who does it apply to?
One of the law's most significant advances is the adoption of an applicability criterion based on the likelihood of access. The Digital ECA applies not only to services targeted to children, but to all those who are “likely to be accessed by minors“This distinction is crucial, as it dramatically expands the scope of regulation.
This pattern directly mirrors the criterion of Age-Appropriate Design Code (AADC) of the United Kingdom and Online Safety Act.The European Union takes a similar approach. In practice, this means that the law is not limited to educational applications. General audience platforms, such as social networks, streaming services, and online games, are unequivocally within the scope of the Digital ECA.
What are “Digital Products and Services”?
The law adopts a comprehensive and technology-neutral definition to ensure its longevity. The definition encompasses, but is not limited to:
- Social media platforms and messaging apps.
- Video sharing and streaming services.
- Online games and interactive applications.
- Educational technology platforms (EdTechs).
- Search engines and online marketplaces (marketplaces).
- Connected toys and Internet of Things (IoT) devices.
This list, inspired by legislation such as the UK's AADC, ensures that almost the entire interactive digital ecosystem is subject to the new obligations.
The Four Pillars of Regulation
The Digital ECA is structured around four interconnected pillars. Together, they form a robust protective network.
!(placeholder_image_1.jpg “Pillars of the Digital ECA and the new legal architecture for minors”)
1. Age Verification and Parental Consent (Age Assurance)
This is perhaps the most challenging pillar. The law requires providers to implement age assurance mechanisms (age assurance) “highly effective.” This marks the end of self-reporting as an acceptable method.
- The Mandate and Technologies: The demand for "high effectiveness" drives the adoption of more robust technologies. These include document verification, facial age estimation, and digital identity services. At the same time, privacy-focused solutions are emerging, such as the W3C's Verifiable Credentials (VCs). They allow for the verification of attributes without revealing sensitive data.
- Privacy Implications: The implementation of these technologies is not without risks. The collection of biometric data, for example, raises serious concerns about consent, security, and algorithmic bias. Studies warn of the dangers of facial data breaches and the inaccuracy of many systems, which can lead to exclusions.
2. Content Moderation and the Duty of Care
The Digital ECA brings about a fundamental shift in content accountability. The focus shifts from content removal. illegal for a proactive duty to mitigate exposure to content harmful. The law establishes high-priority content categories, such as those that promote suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders. Thus, platforms have a duty of care (duty of care) to actively prevent minors from encountering this type of material.
3. Algorithmic Transparency
This pillar aims to demystify the "black boxes" of algorithms. Inspired by the European Union's DSA, the Digital ECA requires platforms to provide clear and accessible explanations about how their recommendation systems work. Young people and their guardians have the right to know why content was recommended and how they can influence those recommendations.
4. The “Best Interests of the Child” as a Guiding Principle
This is the philosophical heart of the law. The internationally recognized principle of "best interests of the child" becomes the primary criterion for all design decisions. This requires companies to conduct Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs). Such assessments must explicitly weigh commercial interests against potential harm to children's well-being.
Comparative Table of Global Regulatory Frameworks
To contextualize the Digital ECA, the following table compares its key elements with other pioneering legislation around the world.
| Feature | Digital ECA (Law 15.211/2025) – Brazil | UK Online Safety Act 2023 | EU Digital Services Act | California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act |
| Central Principle | Best Interest of the Child | Proactive Duty of Care | Systemic Risk Mitigation | Best Interest of the Child |
| Scope | Services “likely to be accessed” by minors under 18 | Services “likely to be accessed” by minors under 18 | All intermediaries; stricter rules for very large platforms (VLOPs) | Online services “likely to be accessed” by children under 18 |
| Age Verification | Requirement for “highly effective” methods” | Requirement of “highly effective” methods for priority harmful content | Recommended measure for VLOPs; not mandatory for all | Require risk-based age estimation or treat everyone as minors |
| Regulated Content | Illegal and “legal but harmful” | Illegal and “legal but harmful” | Main focus on illegal content; systemic risks for VLOPs | Focus on harmful design and data usage, not specific content |
| Maximum Sanctions | Up to 10% of global revenue | £18 million or 10% of global turnover (whichever is greater) | Up to 6% of global revenue | Fines of $2,500 to $7,500 per affected child |
| Regulatory Body | National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) and other bodies | Ofcom | European Commission (for VLOPs) and national Digital Services Coordinators | California Attorney General |
Part II: Duties and Obligations of Platforms and EdTechs
The Digital ECA translates its principles into concrete obligations that impact product design and monetization strategies. The law transforms engagement practices into regulated activities with the potential for legal liability. Consequently, this imposes a new operational dynamic, in which legal teams must collaborate closely with product and design teams. These obligations are the pillars of the ECA Digital and the new legal architecture that it implements.
Security and Privacy by Design and Default
The law states that protection must be the initial setting, not an option to be activated.
- Default Settings: The Digital ECA mandates that the most protective settings be applied by default to minor users. This includes private profiles, disabled geolocation, and minimized data collection. Large platforms have already adopted this approach in response to international laws. Bill 2.628/2022 in Brazil already provided for a "default protective setting," indicating alignment with this trend.
- Interfaces and “Dark Patterns” (Dark Patterns): The law prohibits the use of “pushing techniques” (nudge techniques) and other deceptive designs. Such techniques manipulate children into providing more data or remaining engaged longer. Legislation such as the AADC and DSA already contains similar prohibitions, directly challenging UI/UX practices focused on maximizing data collection.
Control over Monetization and Advertising
The Digital ECA directly attacks economic models that exploit data from young people.
- Targeted Advertising: Profiling minors' data for targeted advertising is prohibited. Platforms cannot use a minor's browsing history or interests to display personalized ads. This is one of the most impactful measures, aligned with the explicit prohibition of the European DSA. Advocacy groups, such as (), argue that this ban is vital to dismantling the surveillance-based business model.
- High Risk Monetization Mechanisms: The law imposes strict controls on microtransactions and prohibits mechanisms that resemble gambling, such as loot boxes. Bill 2.628/2022 already proposed banning these mechanisms. The justification is robust: research demonstrates a strong psychological correlation between loot boxes and gambling addiction, as both exploit the principle of intermittent variable reward.
The Impact on Recommendation Algorithms
The Digital ECA recognizes that algorithmic design is not neutral and can be a source of harm. Therefore, the law requires that recommendation systems be designed to mitigate psychological risks.
- “Rabbit Hole Effects” and “Dopamine Cycles”: Regulation addresses “rabbit hole effects” (rabbit hole effects), where algorithms can lead users to progressively more extreme content. Furthermore, the law aims to disrupt addictive "dopamine loops" designed to maximize engagement. The EU's DSA already requires large platforms to mitigate the risks of "addictive behavior." The basis for this concern is scientific. Indeed, studies demonstrate how short-form video platforms are designed to deliver quick dopamine "hits." This mechanism can impair sustained attention, executive function, and emotional regulation in adolescents, whose brains are still developing. The European Commission's investigations into TikTok were initiated based on these concerns.
Part III: Practical Impacts and Gray Areas in the Education Sector
The educational technology (EdTech) sector is under particular scrutiny with the Digital ECA. The law forces a reflection on the boundary between pedagogical innovation and commercial exploitation. Legislation such as the UK's AADC already establishes that EdTech providers are subject to the same rules. Furthermore, reports from () have already exposed how EdTech products often use behavioral advertising and collect student data without proper safeguards.
Challenges in Implementation in Learning Environments
- Large-Scale Age Verification: Implementing robust age verification systems for thousands of students presents logistical and privacy challenges. Schools will have to manage parental consent and ensure data security, creating a new layer of complexity.
- Pedagogical Recommendation Algorithms: The line between an algorithm that personalizes learning and one that exploits engagement mechanisms is a fine one. The Digital ECA will require EdTech developers to demonstrate that their systems are pedagogically sound and designed for student well-being.
The Fine Line of Gamification
Gamification is a powerful pedagogical tool that uses game elements to motivate students. However, under the Digital ECA, its design must be carefully evaluated to avoid becoming exploitative.
- Gamification vs. “Dark Patterns”: Techniques that create excessive social pressure or encourage compulsive use may be construed as prohibited "nudge techniques." The distinction will depend on whether the design serves a legitimate educational purpose.
- Microtransactions in an Educational Context: Introducing in-app purchases into educational apps is a high-risk area. This practice can create inequality, generate pressure to spend, and blur the lines between learning environments and commercial spaces.
Shared Responsibility: Schools, Governments and Suppliers
The Digital ECA establishes a chain of responsibility. Although schools are not directly targeted, they assume a co-responsible role when selecting third-party technologies. Inspired by models like the AADC, the Digital ECA requires schools to audit their suppliers, requiring proof of compliance as a condition of contracting.
This new regulatory dynamic has the potential to reshape the EdTech market. The law directly challenges the "freemium" business model, in which many tools are offered "for free" in exchange for mining student data for commercial purposes.
By prohibiting targeted advertising and requiring data minimization, the Digital ECA makes this model unsustainable. Consequently, educational institutions will change their purchasing criteria. They will now prioritize security and ethical design over zero cost. Therefore, the law acts as a market force. It encourages the development of paid, privacy-respecting EdTech products, rather than "free" and exploitative ones.
Part IV: Regulatory Risks, Sanctions and the Interface with the LGPD
Sanctions Analysis: The Power of Deterrence
To ensure compliance, the Digital ECA establishes a strict sanctions regime, mirroring the most stringent international precedents.
- THE European Union DSA provides for fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue.
- THE UK OSA establishes fines of up to 10% of global revenue.
- In Brazil, the Bill 2.628/2022 already proposed fines of up to 10% of the group's revenue in Brazil.
The Digital ECA will likely adopt a model based on global revenue. This is the only effective measure to significantly penalize multinational corporations and ensure that compliance is a strategic priority.
Intersection with LGPD: A Double Layer of Protection
The Digital ECA does not replace the LGPD, but builds on it, creating an additional layer of protection for minors.
- The LGPD already requires parental consent for the processing of children's data. The National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) is already demonstrating a growing focus in this area, with actions being taken against platforms for age verification failures.
- The Digital ECA, however, goes further. While the LGPD focuses on consent, the Digital ECA imposes obligations of design and prohibits certain forms of processing, such as profiling for advertising purposes, regardless of consent. It regulates not only "what" is done with the data, but also "how" services should be built.
The Conflict of Fundamental Rights: Protection vs. Freedom of Expression
It's inevitable that the Digital ECA will face legal challenges. The main argument will be the alleged infringement of freedom of expression. Indeed, the international debate, particularly in the United States, offers a glimpse of the legal battle to come.
The American Precedent: NetChoice v. Bonta
The NetChoice association's lawsuit against California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AADC) is a paradigmatic case. In it, American courts suspended the law based on First Amendment arguments. The main argument was that the law imposes a content-based restriction, requiring companies to mitigate "harmful" material, a term considered vague. Furthermore, the age estimation requirement was seen as a burden on the freedom of anonymous expression, forcing adults to identify themselves.
The Human Rights Perspective and the Legal Battle in Brazil
In contrast, the human rights approach argues that companies have a responsibility to ensure that their operations do not violate rights. From this perspective, the "best interests of the child" justifies limiting corporate "speech" when it causes harm. This perspective, therefore, frames regulation as a product safety standard, not as censorship.
The legal viability of the Digital ECA in Brazil will depend on how the courts interpret its clauses. The central question will be whether the "duty of care" governs harmful business conduct or if it represents a form of content censorship.
Companies will likely import the case argument NetChoice. On the other hand, the law's supporters will argue that the purpose of regulation is not the speech of users, but the conduct of companies in designing harmful products. Thus, the law's success will depend on the judiciary's ability to frame its provisions as safety and health protection measures.
Conclusion: From Regulatory Obligation to Strategic Advantage
The enactment of the Digital ECA represents much more than a new set of obligations. It signals a maturation of the Brazilian digital ecosystem, where innovation can no longer be dissociated from responsibility. For companies, compliance with the ECA Digital and the new legal architecture should not be seen as a burden. On the contrary, it should be a catalyst for the development of safer, more ethical, and reliable products.
Brazil's legal-tech community now has the opportunity to lead by example. In an era of growing distrust, trust has become the most valuable asset. Companies that embrace the principles of the Digital ECA—security by design, transparency, and user well-being—will not only be complying with the law. They will, above all, be building a sustainable competitive advantage.
Additional Compliance Resources
Glossary of Essential Terms of the Digital ECA
Risk-Based Age Estimation: The principle that the level of certainty required for age verification should be proportionate to the risks associated with the service.
Safe Digital Environment: It refers to the holistic digital ecosystem that a provider must create, considering interface design, high privacy settings, and proactive moderation systems.
Intermittent Variable Reward: Psychological mechanism, used in loot boxes and feeds, which provide unpredictable rewards to maximize engagement. Under the Digital ECA, their use is a high-risk practice.
Default Child Profile: The default state for any new account. Until the user's age is verified, the account must operate with all maximum protections enabled.
Proactive Duty of Care: The legal obligation to anticipate, assess and actively mitigate the risks of foreseeable harm to minors.
