There's already Australian High Court precedent establishing that Australian ISP's are blind providers of data with no obligation to spy on their users for the benefit of third parties wanting user intel to connect the dots.
That was WRT torrenting, but it's a case that'd serve as a foundation for any push back in other related claims.
This case is important in copyright law of Australia because it tests copyright law changes required in the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement, and set a precedent for future law suits about the responsibility of Australian Internet service providers with regards to copyright infringement via their services.
The managing director of iiNet, Michael Malone, claimed that "iiNet cannot disconnect a customer's phone line based on an allegation. The alleged offence needs to be pursued by the police and proven in the courts. iiNet would then be able to disconnect the service as it had been proven that the customer had breached our Customer Relations Agreement,"
In general it established that Australian ISP's are not obligated to act as a nanny wrt their customers.
ISP's can, of course, choose to do all manner of MiTM behaviour and monitoring but they are not obligated* to do so.
* save via five eyes related unspoken mandatory duties nobody talks about
> The ISP doesn't need to know what the content is or be pro-actively looking for content.
Sure, be it a torrent or pornography, the ISP doesn't have to care in Australia.
> The rightsholder would look at the connecting IP and then contact the owner of that IP for if that IP was allowed to view age-restricted content.
eg: Hollywood Inc. would contact the ISP to ask for details about the customer using that IP address at a particular time.
The existing court ruling establishes that the ISP has no obligation to provide customer details to Hollywood Inc. or to any third party provider of (say) pornography.
Also, typically an ISP customer is a household that contains adults, children, relatives, boarders, passerby's that use the router Guest account, etc.
So, not only is the ISP not obligated to provide customer details, those details are most likely those of an adult over the age of 18 as 12 year olds rarely have an account with an Australian ISP provider.
That was WRT torrenting, but it's a case that'd serve as a foundation for any push back in other related claims.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadshow_Films_Pty_Ltd_v_iiNet...
In general it established that Australian ISP's are not obligated to act as a nanny wrt their customers.ISP's can, of course, choose to do all manner of MiTM behaviour and monitoring but they are not obligated* to do so.
* save via five eyes related unspoken mandatory duties nobody talks about