RED THREADS.

Money. Identity. Technology.
Follow the money. Find the decision.

← All subjectsSafety & rights

Moving child-rights proposals into legislation and technical standards

5Rights Foundation

5Rights Foundation campaigns to make digital services answerable to children's rights. Founded by Beeban Kidron, it combines philanthropic support, technical-policy proposals and legislative work, including a documented paid lobbying operation supporting California's Age-Appropriate Design Code.

5Rights Foundation is a UK advocacy organization founded by Beeban Kidron. Its central project is to make children's rights a design requirement for digital services. That gives it an interest in how platforms assess users' ages, configure their products and demonstrate that they have considered children's welfare. Kidron's position in the House of Lords also gives this work a direct parliamentary connection.

The organization has substantial philanthropic backing. Oak Foundation's 2023 report lists a $2 million three-year core-support award. Omidyar Network's tax returns record $600,000 in general operating support paid in 2021 and $850,000 in 2023. Later disclosed awards support legal standards, research and technical norms. This kind of core funding sustains the staff and specialist work needed to remain involved through a lengthy legislative process.

California supplies an unusually concrete example of that process. Official analyses identify 5Rights as a co-sponsor of the 2022 Age-Appropriate Design Code. A Capitol Connection filing records a $50,000 lobbying engagement for five months of work. The associated material includes drafts, amendments and correspondence with legislative offices. Kidron's letters argued for retaining protection through age seventeen as opponents sought lower age cutoffs.

In the UK, 5Rights has pressed for age tokens, privacy protections and standards that help services choose assurance providers. It has also called for premarket certification of technology affecting children. Ofcom accepted some ideas and rejected others, including a separate privacy criterion because data-protection law already applied. The resulting picture is an organization repeatedly turning a broad rights claim into practical proposals about product design, admission to services and proof of compliance.

CapConn Exhibit AB with 5Rights contract and activity/receipt appendices ↗5Rights: California Age Appropriate Design Code ↗Oak annual report · pp4–5 ↗2023 tax return · p11 ↗5Rights: Protecting Children from Harms Online response, 17 July 2024 ↗

Assessment updated 2026-09-12

Detailed records and research

What the records show

5Rights Foundation → Capitol Connection

$50k · paid lobbying contract

Services 2022; filed 27 Jun 2024

Contract for May-September2022 services at USD10,000/month; five USD10,000 receipts are reported over date ranges, not exact bank dates. Client owns contract work including drafts; specified nonpublic disclosure and expenses require consent/advance approval. No blanket editorial-approval clause or exercised output approval established. Neither a UK-government source nor the later2023 Oak award is established as this contract funding. Financial details: value: 50,000; currency: USD; kind: five registrant-reported receipts; period: Ranges June2-October4,2022 for May-September services; see filingp21

CapConn Exhibit AB with 5Rights contract and activity/receipt appendices ↗

5Rights Foundation → California AB2273

Sponsored California adaptation

Historical UK / California codes

Original2022 California analyses confirm5Rights co-sponsorship. Chaptered text under18 coverage and allowed applying child protections to all consumers instead of estimating age. Kidron sought under18, but causation of the final provision and present enforceability were not assessed.

5Rights: California Age Appropriate Design Code ↗Senate Judiciary analysis, June28 hearing ↗AB2273 historical chaptered2022 text ↗

5Rights Foundation → 5Rights privacy criterion proposal · March 2024

requested express privacy criterion

Document labelled March 2024; exact submission day not established.

5Rights asked for privacy-preserving assurance as a criterion, with minimal data collection, limited retention and security; its proposed on-device/result-only approach sought to avoid a central identity database linked to online activity.

5Rights: Part5 pornographic-content guidance consultation response, March 2024 ↗

5Rights Foundation → 5Rights age-token proposal · July 2024

recommended age tokens in broader assurance ecosystem

Document 17 July 2024.

5Rights argued for age ranges and a broader ecosystem, including privacy-preserving age tokens, for age-appropriate experiences. Its criticism of the draft as binary is the respondent's characterization.

5Rights: Protecting Children from Harms Online response, 17 July 2024 ↗

5Rights Foundation → 5Rights standards/certification proposal · October 2025

urged standards and certification consideration

Document labelled October 2025; exact submission day not established.

5Rights recommended numerical thresholds tied to risk/age ranges and urged Ofcom to consider certification to help services choose age-assurance partners, citing IEEE 2089.1–2024 and ACCS.

5Rights: Additional Safety Measures response, October 2025 ↗

Omidyar Network → 5Rights Foundation

$850k paid · 2023

2023

General operating support paid during 2023; this later payment cannot fund an earlier 2022 transaction without additional evidence.

2023 tax return · p11 ↗

Rothschild Foundation → 5Rights Foundation

£150k award · AI / EdTech

Awarded 18 Jul 2025; planned 2025–28

Research award; cash disbursement not verified. Historical zero disbursement field is not a current payment total.

Rothschild publisher grant data ↗

5Rights Foundation → Child Safety ON

Listed campaign supporter

Observed 2026-09-08

5Rights appears among the campaign's supporter links. Support does not establish steering rights or funding.

Child Safety ON: campaign and supporters ↗

From the investigation

Who funded and contributed

The report's back cover separately acknowledges 5Rights Foundation funding of the DFC centre , describing DFC as a joint LSE/5Rights research centre. Centre support is not evidence of a report-specific earmark. No amount, disbursement, grant conditions, manuscript-approval right or publication veto was acquired.

Read the research & sources ↗

Further reading

Steam transcript intake: age credentials, policy sponsorship, and data custody ↗

G7 minors instruments: assurance commitments, privacy limits and the missing compulsory gate ↗

Encryption-guidance origins: funding, review access and the missing wording record ↗

Oak support for GDI: specified capacity and a commercial intervention ↗

AI Red Lines: the operational structure ↗

Baseline evidence custody ↗

5Rights–Capitol Connection: the 2022 operation now has a documentary middle ↗

UK age assurance: specific advocacy contributions and decisions ↗

Read the original sources 8
5Rights: About us5Rights: California Age Appropriate Design CodeSenate Judiciary analysis, June28 hearingAB2273 historical chaptered2022 text2021 tax return · p112023 tax return · p11CapConn Exhibit AB with 5Rights contract and activity/receipt appendicesOak annual report · pp4–5

See the connections

Open this part of the network ↗
Resources & divergence

Oak’s grants to five organisations

Oak reports three-year support to these five recipients. Each amount belongs to its own grant year and purpose. The arrows have equal weight; they do not measure financial influence.

Open diagram →
The main branches

Digital-rights policy & funders

Follow the named relationships between the main participants in this part of the investigation.

Open diagram →

What the connections say

17 relationships
2

5Rights Foundation → Sponsored California adaptation → California AB2273

Historical UK / California codes

Original2022 California analyses confirm5Rights co-sponsorship. Chaptered text under18 coverage and allowed applying child protections to all consumers instead of estimating age. Kidron sought under18, but causation of the final provision and present enforceability were not assessed.

Read the original sources 3
5Rights: California Age Appropriate Design CodeSenate Judiciary analysis, June28 hearingAB2273 historical chaptered2022 text
5

5Rights Foundation → $50k · paid lobbying contract → Capitol Connection

Services 2022; filed 27 Jun 2024

Contract for May-September2022 services at USD10,000/month; five USD10,000 receipts are reported over date ranges, not exact bank dates. Client owns contract work including drafts; specified nonpublic disclosure and expenses require consent/advance approval. No blanket editorial-approval clause or exercised output approval established. Neither a UK-government source nor the later2023 Oak award is established as this contract funding.

Financial details: value: 50,000; currency: USD; kind: five registrant-reported receipts; period: Ranges June2-October4,2022 for May-September services; see filingp21

Read the original source 1
CapConn Exhibit AB with 5Rights contract and activity/receipt appendices
12

Beeban Kidron → declared chair role in debate → 5Rights Foundation

Declaration 6 July 2023; not an open-ended tenure finding.

At the new Report stage Kidron declared that she chaired 5Rights Foundation.

A contemporaneously declared NGO/parliamentary role bridge; does not establish donor instructions.

Read the original source 1
Hansard: Lords chamber, 6 July 2023

Read the wider story

Safety & rights

One donor. Conflicting agendas.

Oak Foundation funds both online-safety advocacy and organisations challenging surveillance. Follow the grants, then follow each recipient’s choices.

Read the story