How would the Digital Duty of Care treat a business like mine?

Indicative: lower risk

The site: services, prices, a photo gallery the owner uploads, and a contact form.

Why: everything on the site is the owner's own content. Enquiries go to the business and are not shown to anyone else.

For now: nothing.

If the Bill passes: expect a short checkbox assessment. See what one might look like.

Indicative: lower risk

The site: a menu, opening hours and a booking widget from a booking company. Reviews are on Google, not on the site.

Why: a booking takes details and a time. The booking company is responsible for its own service, and Google for the reviews on Google.

For now: check whether any comment or review feature is switched on in the website builder, and note it.

If the Bill passes: expect a short checkbox assessment.

Indicative: moderate risk

The site: a checkout, customer accounts, product reviews with photos, and a news blog with comments on.

Why: selling adds no risk. Reviews, review photos and blog comments all let the public publish on the site.

For now: note which of the three are used and what they are worth to the business.

If the Bill passes: hold reviews and comments for approval, and consider switching off blog comments if nobody uses them. Guide for online shops.

Indicative: moderate risk

The site: services, practitioner profiles, online booking, and a new AI assistant that answers questions.

Why: the Bill names AI services directly, and a health chatbot can be asked about anything. Without the chatbot the site would be lower risk.

For now: choose a chatbot with safety settings the clinic controls, see how it behaves off topic, and keep the results.

If the Bill passes: limit the bot to bookings and clinic information. Once the duty starts, the assessment would come before a new chatbot goes live. Chatbot guide.

Indicative: higher risk

The site: a portal where students under 18 and tutors message each other and upload work.

Why: it combines the three things eSafety's early criteria single out: messaging, uploads, and adults and children interacting.

For now: map who can message whom, what an administrator can see, and how a problem is reported. Child-safety practice matters here whatever happens to the Bill.

If the Bill passes: tighten those settings and consider legal advice. Guide to forums, messaging and uploads.

Indicative: moderate risk

The site: class timetables, online sign-up and a members-only forum for adults.

Why: a forum lets users interact with each other. With adult members and no private messaging it stays in the moderate band. Adding teenage members or direct messages would move it higher.

For now: note how active the forum is and who looks after it.

If the Bill passes: publish forum rules, name a moderator and add a report link.

Indicative: lower risk

The site: property listings, an enquiry form on each, and saved searches for logged-in users.

Why: listings are the agency's content. Accounts and saved searches are not interaction between users.

For now: nothing.

If the Bill passes: note the saved-search and "similar properties" features in the assessment.

Indicative: moderate risk

The business: builds, hosts and administers websites for other small businesses.

Why: hosting is one of the Bill's nine service types, and an agency with day-to-day control of a client's site may be responsible for it alongside the client.

For now: list which client sites have reviews, forums, uploads or chatbots.

If the Bill passes: agree in writing with each client who does what. Who is responsible when an agency runs a site.

Not the responsible party

The presence: an Instagram account and a Facebook page. No website.

Why: the platforms provide those services and carry the duty for them. The stallholder is a user.

For now and later: nothing. This changes if the business launches its own website.