- 28 Mar 08, 11:35 GMT
The reason is simple - when it comes to legislation, only the games industry is being affected.
For the internet, specifically virtual worlds, social networks and video sharing sites Dr Tanya's emphasis is on education and awareness.
As I've said in a previous report this is because regulating the net and the morass of user generated content on it is a task no government in its right mind would want to tackle, because it is a geo-political nightmare.
And if you read the official statements and reaction from different quarters of the internet industry all of them are universally applauding the review.
Why? Because they know they have been let off the hook, so to speak.
There's no legislation, no hint of regulation, no potential fines, no requirements to implement technological change.
In fact the online industries can go on exactly as they have done before, as long as they sign up to a few awareness campaigns and keep on promoting the safety features all of them say are already in place.
Here's a few of their responses:
Bebo welcomes the recommendations laid out in the Byron review. It represents a significant step forward and reflects and formalises the collaborative approach and shared responsibility taken by Bebo and industry already with government and other relevant stakeholders. The review sets out realistic timings and goals to ensure that internet safety standards continually improve.
The Internet Services Providers’ Association (ISPA UK) – the UK’s leading Internet trade association - is delighted to see that the key recommendations given in its submission to the Byron Review in November have been acknowledged and that Dr Byron recognises the complexity of the issues.
Facebook recognises the need to support parents and teachers in negotiating and understanding the online world that our children are growing up in and to provide practical advice on how users can replicate their offline controls online. User privacy has always been important to Facebook and the technology has been designed to replicate real-world connections online, with the ability to select personal privacy settings and provide complete user control.
Google is deeply committed to protecting children on the Internet and providing all of our users with a safe experience online, through empowerment, education, and protective measures. We have developed technological solutions, like the Google SafeSearch feature to letting users "flag" inappropriate content on YouTube; we have collaborated with child safety organizations, like BeatBullying, Childnet, the Child Exploitation & Online Protection Centre (CEOP), and the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), to educate users about safe internet usage; and we work closely with law enforcement authorities around the world to prevent child exploitation.
Do you notice a theme? It's basically the industry saying: "We're doing all we can but happy to co-operate in any way possible."
This is not an entirely unreasonable position. After all these websites and association do have many, many measures in place to try and ensure safety.
The problem is that children are ignoring them and parents are not enforcing them.
The government doesn't want to be the online nanny and Internet Service Providers and social network definitely don't want to be given responsibility for what their customers get up to online.
So it's as you were for the online world.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites