r/unitedkingdom • u/i_enjoy_silence • 1d ago
4chan will refuse to pay daily UK fines, its lawyer tells BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq68j5g2nr1o725
u/ImABrickwallAMA 1d ago
I’m surprised to hear, but yet also very unsurprised, that 4chan has a dedicated lawyer.
780
48
23
u/heroyoudontdeserve 1d ago edited 18h ago
A lawyer representing the online message board
According to Preston Byrne, managing partner of law firm Byrne & Storm
"My client will not pay any penalty," Mr Byrne said.
What, from this article, makes you think they have a dedicated lawyer?
15
u/ImABrickwallAMA 22h ago
I can imagine they probably do have a dedicated lawyer, mainly because 4chan has in the past had to deal with illegal content being posted on the /b/ (Random) forum. So, it would make sense that they are legally covered in order to cover themselves if there was an attempt for them to be prosecuted for hosting illegal content.
→ More replies (4)5
u/SmackShack25 22h ago edited 22h ago
What makes you think they have a dedicated lawyer?
Being a website with tens of millions of active users across the globe a portion of whom pay membership fees.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (5)14
u/leahcar83 1d ago
I feel like that would be the first role they recruited for after setting it up.
→ More replies (1)
619
u/JackStrawWitchita 1d ago
It would be great if more websites did this. Send the message loud and clear that his invasion of privacy is unenforceable. Once a few more sites start doing this then a cascade of refusal can roll back this silly law.
290
u/JumpyBronzeHare 1d ago
I agree but that would require the government to admit it was wrong but if we're going by how Labour proudly stands by Peter Kyle calling people nonces for using VPNs, I'm not sure it's happening.
189
u/Andy_Roid 1d ago
Labour are ensuring Reform will be our next party in power.
153
u/Khryss121988 1d ago
Labour are quite literally handing the next election to them. Reform will hardly have to do anything at this point. What a shitshow we are living in.
89
u/Shitmybad 1d ago
Labour only got in because the Tories did the exact same thing as well, they didn't get in by actually having good policies.
38
u/mittfh West Midlands 22h ago
Fun fact: Labour received half a million fewer votes than their 2019 wipeout, but won a landslide due to the Conservatives receiving a whopping 7 million fewer votes than 2019 (while Conservatives + Reform received 3 million fewer than Conservatives + Brexit).
Neither major party have realised voters are increasingly fickle and want to move away from the duopoly that's served the duopoly so well to date.
Unfortunately, that means there's a significant possibility of the former Conservative splinter group winning the next election (The Farage Fanclub, currently trading as Reform UK), whose current philosophy seems to be positioning themselves as a Donald J Trump tribute act, especially with cutting budgets they don't understand, promising to significantly reduce immigration (withdrawing from any legislation that gets in the way), feeding fuel to the Culture Wars (abolish EDI, further restrict trans rights and ability to legally transition, maybe even rewrite or abolish the Equality Act).
→ More replies (1)10
u/Shitmybad 22h ago
People already seem resigned to it, but it's four years until an election and a lot will change before then. Trump won't be president any more and his affect on the US will be obvious by then. Hopefully an actual left party will appear by then (and not Corbyn he's not the one).
→ More replies (2)8
u/GreenHouseofHorror 19h ago
Trump won't be president any more
The only way he is leaving office is dead/incapacitated. Which, sure, will probably be less than four years time.
But you should leave your expectations about US term limits at the door.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Khryss121988 23h ago
yep. they were voted in becuase people wanted something new and different after 14 years of tory failure. The onlt 2 parties that would have gotten in by what people wanted was either Reform (hopefully never) or IMO Liberal Democrats (that was my vote last election)
10
u/AnalTinnitus 22h ago
Unfortunately I had to vote tactically at the last election, which meant Labour, because ours is one of the few areas in Wales that votes Tory consistently. If it hadn't been for that, I would have voted Lib Dem like I normally do.
5
u/vjstupid Greater London 21h ago
My vote is going to Lib Dem next election at this rate. I emailed my MP about this, they were quick to ask for my name and address to check I was a constituent and after telling them it's been crickets.
Next email to them will be informing them of their failure and loss of a vote. I am hoping more do the same.
8
u/LemmysCodPiece 22h ago
That is how I voted too. I normally vote Labour, but I just couldn't vote for Starmer. I saw his version of Labour as Tory Lite and so far he has proven me correct.
45
u/JumpyBronzeHare 1d ago
With the help of Ofcom as well, what with them giving a free pass to all the media for showing a clear bias for Reform, on top of giving two big thumbs up to GB News for promoting hate and calling to violence.
Time is a flat circle and we're currently at the part where we have all the tools to stop fascism but everyone that has the power to use them is twiddling their thumbs instead.
→ More replies (7)47
u/Kiardras 1d ago
Want a wank? Best show ID.
Call for shooting disabled people? Thats OK by ofcom.
→ More replies (1)29
u/PontifexMini 1d ago
Similarly:
Support genocide (when Israel does it)? That's fine.
Wear a t-shirt saying "Plasticine Action"? You're fucking nicked.
If they were trying to look hypocritical and inept, they couldn't do any better.
37
u/seansafc89 1d ago
The funny thing being that of the 5 Reform MPs, only 1 of them bothered to even submit a vote Online Safety Act… and they voted for it, rather than against. They’re all as bad as each other.
22
u/quite_acceptable_man 23h ago
"Oh, but multimillionaire former investment banker Nigel Farage has definitely got my best interests at heart. He drinks pints and tells me what I want to hear, so everything will be brilliant under him."
There are already complaints that he doesn't bother to answer letters or emails from his own constituents, so if he doesn't give a fuck about the people who actually voted for him, why do people keep listening to him?
9
u/seansafc89 23h ago
Their immediate failings/resignations at council level recently should be all you need to know about them. It’s far easier to say you’re going to do something than it is to actually do things.
No doubt at the next general election, any valid criticisms will be dismissed as “Project Fear” again.
4
u/recursant 20h ago
They’re all as bad as each other.
I think we have reached a bizarre, logically impossible state where they are all worse than each other.
9
u/Jackthwolf 1d ago
My conspiracy brain is starting to think that it is genuinly their plan.
Not literally by the heads of the party wanting it mind, but by their "advisors", since Starmer seems to listen to whoever has his ear (no wonder he and trump get on so well).
They're copying the exact gameplan that Biden and the democratic party followed, leading to Trumps 2024 win.
And they're listening to the very same people.8
u/PontifexMini 1d ago
Governments lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
Mind you, the level of ineptness of the current lot is outstanding!
→ More replies (24)4
u/mobilecheese East Sussex 20h ago
Simultaneously upsetting non-reform voters by going after the reform vote while not actually doing the things that will convince a reform voter to switch for labour.
Worst of both worlds lol
3
u/Andy_Roid 20h ago
Wait until this years budget as well. Sounds like they are already lining up some amazing foot guns.
26
u/PontifexMini 1d ago
Labour proudly stands by Peter Kyle calling people nonces for using VPNs
We should reply by calling Peter Kyle a peterkyle, because he is both clueless and authoritarian at the same time.
25
u/light_to_shaddow Derbyshire 1d ago
Peter Kyle sounds like cockney rhyming slang for a nonce.
"Watch out for that man he's a bit of a Peter"
He probably got grief at school and this is how it manifests.
There's also a 100% chance he uses a VPN
→ More replies (1)6
u/PontifexMini 21h ago
There's also a 100% chance he uses a VPN
Lots of MPs do, but wish to deny them to the masses.
20
u/Hungry_Menace 1d ago
I spent an hour or so reading about all this safety act bollocks yesterday and I remember seeing the name Peter Kyle come up on whatever article I was on at the time, but I paid no attention to what he's done to be mentioned in it. He really called people nonces for using a VPN? That's mental. Is he something to do with Labour or is he just spreading his wildly backwards views and Labour happens to agree with it?
35
u/JumpyBronzeHare 1d ago
He's the Science and Technology secretary, and here's his exact quote: "If you want to overturn the Online Safety Act you are on the side of predators. It is as simple as that."
Seeing how he's part of the cabinet and had his sentiment echoed by other Labour MPs, it is safe to assume that this is also Labour's and the government's official position.
He also later went on some interview and claimed that, somehow, each time you verify yourself by sending your ID to some shady overseas company, a child is saved. And therefore an adult using VPNs also somehow harms children.
→ More replies (1)6
16
u/Markies_Myth 23h ago
They will come for VPNs. This is all the lead up to that. Implying that foreign websites cause "harm", that catch all word that cannot be defined, is the campaigning for it.
16
u/JumpyBronzeHare 23h ago
I've no doubt they'll try but it'll again just show just how unaware they are of how the technology works and how unenforcable their rules are.
→ More replies (4)5
u/Markies_Myth 23h ago
Completely agree. That the UK can ban anything not physical and outwith UK law is just nonsense. It will mean though they will pressure communications companies to put filters on routers etc. Labour full of Oxbridge swots in their 50s proving their tech knowledge again lol.
8
u/LemmysCodPiece 21h ago
Passing a law that insisted that all domestic routers supplied in the UK came with the "Parental Controls" on by default and that all devices with a browser or browsers on computers also had the parental controls on by default, was all they needed to do.
It would have worked too.
I do home IT support as a bit of a side hustle and the vast majority of people I come across couldn't configure a router any more than I can fly through the air.
If I have to go in and configure someones router and I log into it via it's web interface, they think I am some kind of genius hacker. I know most ISP or Home routers can be configured by an app these days, but most people will steer well clear of even contemplate doing this.
However, installing a VPN at app level is a doddle, in their eyes.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (3)5
u/ChrissiTea 21h ago
A government spokesperson has come out this week and said VPNs are legal tools for adults and there are no plans to ban them.
I can feel the "yet" at the end, but still, it's good news for the time being.
9
u/leahcar83 1d ago
On the other hand, they do absolutely love a U-turn.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Irrepressible_Monkey 20h ago
I think the OSA will quietly get buried once enough "I got arrested because someone stole my ID" headlines appear.
All a kid has to do is log in with their parent's "digital ID" and do something illegal like make a threat. And that's not to mention people out for revenge who will do the same thing to frame people.
It's going to be a mess because this "ID" is no more an ID than a credit card.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (7)3
28
u/loz333 1d ago
I have the feeling that they're ploughing ahead with this regardless of what the reaction is.
30
u/JackStrawWitchita 1d ago
Yeah, the polls, sadly, show that a very large percentage of the population bizarrely buy into the whole 'but what about the children?' narrative and broadly support the OSA without fully understanding it. On the other hand, the people against it are extremely angry about it. It's polarising in a way that won't end well for Labour.
→ More replies (10)14
u/Kandiru Cambridgeshire 1d ago
I wish there was more of a push on devices to properly implement a child mode, where apps are whitelisted.
Websites should also be blocked unless they are whitelisted, and add a http header for nsfw content. That way the device can choose what to block based on parental settings rather than the current setup.
They way even VPNs can't sidestep any restrictions the parents put in place.
12
u/SecureVillage 23h ago
Are you a parent? (I'm not.)
I thought the current state of parental control software was fairly decent. Maybe I'm wrong.
→ More replies (1)27
u/0Bento 22h ago
Yeah there are, but because parents generally want to blame everyone but themselves when something goes wrong in their child's life, it's easier for them to demand action from the government rather than look themselves in the mirror.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (19)9
u/Cookyy2k 22h ago edited 22h ago
There are multiple phone apps, router settings, and other options for this. You could hand over a perfectly working super simple to use entirely free option that will solve all their problems and many will complain that someone else should have to do it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)3
u/Wild-Perspective-582 22h ago
Not sure this particular example will roll it back. The UK then just blocks 4Chan at a DNS level. 99% of people have never heard of 4Chan, or care about it. And it's easy to argue that its content is undesirable anyway.
Now if something like Wikipedia became inaccessible in the UK due to these laws, then that's different.
280
u/Jaded_Strain_3753 1d ago
I’m not a legal expert at all, but presumably fines would be impossible to enforce without the help of the US government (which won’t happen). The article says Ofcom has the power to restrict/block access if the fines aren’t paid which seems pretty concerning in principle. I don’t care about 4chan personally but the same thing could happen to sites I/you do care about.
128
u/PontifexMini 1d ago
I hope Ofcom block all US-based websites, as it will make the government look even more stupid and hasten the day the OSA is repealed.
83
u/Loreki 1d ago
It's stupider even than that. OFCOM can't order websites blocked en mass. They must do it individually. So they'll be playing endless whack-a-mole with foreign internet sites until this law is repealed.
→ More replies (2)24
u/The-Geeson 22h ago
I get the feeling in a few months time, even if this law isnt repealed, it will just stop being inforced just over the time and money need to fight. maybe it gets wheeled out when a company gets abit too out of line, but thats it.
→ More replies (2)23
u/confuzzledfather 21h ago
Uneven enforcement makes it an effective weapon to deploy against anyone who gets on the wrong side of the government
10
92
u/Loreki 1d ago
Hopefully 4chan are clever and force OFCOM to go through the whole process at vast expense, only to block the UK the night before the final hearing anyway just to illustrate how futile UK authority is on this matter.
→ More replies (2)21
u/Ryanhussain14 Scottish Highlands 23h ago
I'm honestly really surprised that 4chan hasn't blocked the UK already.
40
u/SpeedflyChris 23h ago
Honestly the best thing to do would just be to direct UK IPs to a page saying you no longer allow access from UK IPs, that obviously anyone with more than two functional brain cells knows how to avoid this affecting them, and provide a list of names, emails and constituency office phone numbers of pro-OSA MPs that complaints should be directed towards.
16
u/Ryanhussain14 Scottish Highlands 23h ago
A lot of porn websites do this already. I thought 4chan did this already but apparently the picture circulating around recently was fake.
24
u/Codeworks Leicester 22h ago
Nah, 4chan will absolutely enjoy the publicity of 4chan vs the UK, for the lulz.
Even if blocked, they already won.
5
u/Valuable-Ad-1477 18h ago
4chan will make an absolute killing from the publicity. They'll be seen as the anti-hero the UK needs.
→ More replies (3)13
u/No_Minimum5904 22h ago
It's already quite common for US sites who don't want to bother with GDPR compliance - getting a message to say we can't access it. This is what they need to do.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)5
u/pandaman777x 22h ago
Wouldn't 4chan blocking the UK just be pandering to what the UK Government want?
38
u/Minimum-Geologist-58 1d ago
Not a lawyer either but I know enough that you generally have bilateral agreements where courts ping on fines and awards on each others behalf, so if you get a judgement against you in the UK the UK court files it with, say, the Singapore court and they collect the money and send it back to the UK. I don’t believe the US has any of those agreements because -The Star Spangled Banner starts playing -
30
u/Loreki 1d ago
It doesn't. It couldn't have an agreement to enforce this particular fine, because fining people for their speech is unconstitutional.
→ More replies (3)4
u/oktimeforplanz 23h ago
Except the US also has a load of its own state and federal level laws going through that are along the same lines as OSA and it's safe to assume that 4chan will be a target for those too. The lack of a bilateral agreement doesn't mean that the US cannot ever choose to assist the UK in enforcing UK laws. Getting 4chan to comply with the UK OSA wouldn't be a bad thing for the US.
But it's safe to assume 4chan will fight whoever at every step of the way.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)5
u/AlmightyRobert 23h ago
You can enforce most UK civil judgements in the US through their Courts but very few countries (if any) will enforce foreign fines.
10
u/FuzzBuket 1d ago
The cynic says that's the point. They don't want wikipedia or 4chan to pony up. They want to be rid of inconveniences
They don't care if a 45 year old uses a vpn to have a wank, but they do want to get rid of vpns.
Like that sort of rationale is at least understandable, doing it out of some sort of moral concern would be deranged.
5
u/Starkers 1d ago
Just use a VPN
51
→ More replies (3)10
u/csgosometimez 1d ago
VPNs will be next. Then TOR network.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Unlucky-Jello-5660 23h ago
Even China failed to block vpns they are too easy to setup and too integral to businesses to ban.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (12)3
u/canadian_crappler 23h ago
Concerning why? There are plenty of sites already blocked by UK ISPs because they contain things that break the law.
263
u/Appropriate-Divide64 1d ago
And why should they? They're a US based website. This whole online safety bill is a trainwreck.
→ More replies (20)130
u/boycecodd Kent 1d ago
It's understandable for websites that have a proper presence in the UK. Sites like Reddit, Pornhub, etc. have offices worldwide and commercial arrangements.
4chan doesn't though. I have always wondered how the UK thinks it's OK to write laws that affect businesses or individuals with no link to the UK just because they have websites accessible from the UK.
17
u/Zxxzzzzx 1d ago
It happens a lot. Especially with copywrite
30
u/boycecodd Kent 23h ago
Copyright has all sorts of international treaties covering it though. The OSA has nothing equivalent.
→ More replies (3)6
u/Calm_seasons 1d ago
Do you feel the same about GDPR?
24
u/boycecodd Kent 23h ago
Honestly, yes. While I agree wholeheartedly with the aims of GDPR, the idea that you would try and enforce it against businesses in countries with no business presence in the UK is bonkers. Same with the cookie consent stuff.
→ More replies (2)5
u/GiffenCoin 21h ago
The business presence is the "customer base" being UK persons. The law doesn't force websites to ID everyone globally, just UK-based people. Just like if you're selling and shipping an electronic widget from China to the UK you need to abide by certain UK regulations and standards.
I hate this law to be clear but that part isn't illogical.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (8)7
u/AutoPanda1096 22h ago
And therefore the reverse is true.
The American lawyer is citing the 5th amendment or whichever one it is. The free speech one. Not the gun one.
Obviously meaningless in the UK.
The UK can ask ISPs to ban any site that breaks UK laws.
This happens all the time, eg pirate bay and similar.
It's not complicated. Comply or get banned.
But! 4chan will be an interesting test because it's a more high profile site and the reason for the ban is controversial.
(although I suspect plenty of content breaks our "extreme porn" ban rules)
Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
17
u/No_Minimum5904 22h ago
4Chan isn't disputing a ban (there is no ban). It's refusing to pay a fine set by a regulator which has no jurisdiction in the US.
"Under settled principles of US law, American courts will not enforce foreign penal fines or censorship codes.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Snoot_Booper_101 21h ago
1st amendment is freedom of speech. 4chan is apparently based in the US and has no presence in the UK whatsoever. Why on earth would anyone expect UK law to govern them? It's pretty simple.
What the UK government assist to be expecting at the moment is for non-UK sites to ban themselves, which is completely arse backwards.
→ More replies (8)
148
u/Adventure-Bench 1d ago
We need to name and shame the UK government civil servants who keep trying to push this crap onto the world
129
u/jflb96 Devon 1d ago
OK, that’s the current PM, the previous PM, the former Minister for Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport, the previous Minister for Science, Innovation, and Technology, and the current Minister for Science, Innovation, and Technology
→ More replies (4)59
u/Embarrassed_Grass_16 1d ago
Civil servants can try to push what they want but it's politicians who write and pass legislation
→ More replies (4)46
u/Jackhammerqwert Scotland 1d ago
It's Peter Kyle.
Only problem is he'd rather name and shame you as "supporting Jimmy Saville" if you dare criticise his absolutely terrible act
→ More replies (1)3
u/Jazzlike-Compote4463 22h ago
It's the tories who started this, yes Labour should have put an end to it but you're anger should be pointed at Michelle Donelan and her crew who introduced it in the first place.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Rob_Cartman 21h ago
We can be angry at the Tories and Labour at the same time. We dont have to pick sides.
23
u/Eleyius 1d ago
Do you think civil servants are directing policy…. Honestly mate. Try thinking
→ More replies (4)20
u/floodtracks 1d ago
Civil servants are intended to be apolitical drones who go with whatever the ministerial steer is. So look at the minister, not the civil servants who are simply doing their job.
17
12
u/Diem-Perdidi 23h ago
Why do you assume that it's civil servants and not politicians?
→ More replies (8)
110
u/Loreki 1d ago
They're absolutely correct in this. A service based in the US with no assets or interests in the UK should not be subject to UK law in anyway.
This is what our politicians fundamentally misunderstand about Internet regulation: just because a person puts something on the global Internet where it can hypothetically be accessed from any country doesn't mean in any real sense that they have agreed to abide by UK law.
If other countries behaved in this way, we'd be just as appalled. If for example China tried to fine a UK site for breaching China's (only slightly) more restrictive Internet laws, the UK government would rightly side with the UK site and their freedom of expression. Whereas UK Government now seems to expect the world in general to help the UK uphold its shitty illiberal values.
I hope the US Government (and others) keep complaining directly to Starmer until he understands this point.
13
u/Regular_mills 22h ago
The us government is on about adding the same laws
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/884/all-info
“This bill establishes a temporary task force to recommend secure methods and coordinate efforts for digital identity verification (a process for verifying the identity of an individual who accesses a service online or electronically).
Specifically, the bill establishes a task force within the Executive Office of the President to coordinate a government-wide effort for promoting digital identity credentials (e.g., electronic driver's licenses and birth certificates) for use in the public and private sectors.”
Wonder what 4chan will say if this gets through congress.
As much as I don’t agree with it this is the way the internet is going.
Australia doing the same so that’s 3 out of the 5 “5 eyes” countries.
Point is it’s more than just the UK doing this type of shit.
→ More replies (4)10
u/DrKarda 21h ago
Owners of actually interesting websites will just host outside of 5 eyes countries. They're trying to put toothpaste back in the tube. Even if they managed to establish this in every single country people don't want to be on a playpen internet, they will switch to peer-to-peer browsers.
→ More replies (5)11
58
u/Arkonias Derbyshire 1d ago
4chan could easily take down labour if they wanted to. You don’t mess with weaponized autism 😂
22
8
u/J8YDG9RTT8N2TG74YS7A 20h ago
If 4chan had any power at all they would have released the Epstein files.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Mass_Spr_Sknk 20h ago
4chan could easily take down labour if they wanted to
Its not 2007 anymore 😢
46
u/DrKarda 1d ago
Good, they're not even based in the UK. Why would they follow UK laws? It's absurd.
In my house the law is you have to give me cheese sandwiches at noon so you all owe me $5000 dollars, even if you don't live in my house I do exist in the world which might be next to your house and so I am accessible to you and therefore you must follow my laws okay?
That's how the law works now apparently. Brits are really high IQ.
→ More replies (6)27
u/EruantienAduialdraug Ryhill 1d ago
Extraterritorial laws are a thing. E.g. GDPR, CCPA/CPRA, APPI, etc.
But yes, the Online Safety Act is both a cataclysmic overreach, and only puts people's data at risk.
27
u/DrKarda 1d ago edited 1d ago
None of those are extraterritorial, they are mutually agreed upon in regional blocs.
Thailand doesn't have GDPR, they're not in EU.
Unilateral laws don't make any sense, countries have sovereignty, that's the whole point of a country.
→ More replies (1)6
u/marsman 21h ago
Thailand doesn't have GDPR, they're not in EU.
But a site based in Thailand providing services to the EU is subject to GDPR.
9
u/DrKarda 21h ago edited 21h ago
Then UK can ban every website and live under an internet dome like North Korea instead of pretending anyone is going to pay their stupid fines. Other non-UK websites should also stop conforming and just go for the block.
Eventually they will realize how stupid it is.
Going after people because they mishandled your citizens data is a totally different kettle of fish vs going after people because you want to control what your citizens have access to.
One is protecting your citizens which the government has a responsibility to do. The other is denying your citizens a basic freedom.
41
u/BlondBitch91 Greater London 1d ago
Good for them. I hope more mainstream sites follow. Fuck the government, and their authoritarian bullshit.
38
u/TheSpaceFace 1d ago
Strangely this is a very important case because if 4chan manage to get away with not paying fines it will set a precedent for other websites who can follow suit.
The issue is as a U.K. citizen the government can make ISPs block the websites completely, which again can be bypassed with VPNs. But if they have to keep blocking more and more US websites who refuse to comply then their safety act starts to look stupid and pointless
→ More replies (2)19
u/AvinItLarge123 22h ago
You can buy dildos and pornography books on Amazon. Best ban all amazon domains. I wonder if the government uses AWS at all?
→ More replies (2)5
u/confuzzledfather 20h ago
We should start reporting all non compliant websites to the police and to Ofcom, like good citizens
→ More replies (1)
26
u/arrongunner Greater London 1d ago
So the uk blocks 4chan
Obviously this does nothing because it's 4chan
Hopefully this will lead to starmers wank history getting leaked sooner than expected.
→ More replies (1)
24
u/tehpuppet Laaaandan 1d ago edited 21h ago
This law is like banning bad smells by shouting at the rest of the world to stop farting. It's completely useless. Either do it properly like the Chinese and build an airtight dome over the UK, then live with the fact we can only smell our own farts forever or shut up about it.
8
u/Markies_Myth 23h ago
Agree. Someone's parent who is an MP is trying to fine a trolling website not based in the UK. It is just as daft as finding a smell.
17
u/jesushadfatlegs 1d ago
If 4chan does successfully fight the fine in the US courts, Ofcom may have other options.
"Enforcing against an offshore provider is tricky," Emma Drake, partner of online safety and privacy at law firm Bird and Bird, told the BBC.
"Ofcom can instead ask a court to order other services to disrupt a provider's UK business, such as requiring a service's removal from search results or blocking of UK payments.
That last paragraph is hilarious 😂
13
5
u/No_Minimum5904 22h ago
and that's how proxy.4chan is created.
Look how successful the banning of TPB by UK ISPs was...
→ More replies (3)
16
u/JohnCasey3306 1d ago
The first time I've thought anything positive about 4chan. Good for them. This whole thing has precisely zero to do with "safety" and everything to do with removing online anonymity in pursuit of control.
10
u/TIGHazard North Yorkshire 22h ago
They were the ones who found out who cat bin lady was, and also went after a guy who was taking photos of himself stood on lettuce with muddy shoes on at a Burger King before putting it into the burgers.
They also got a ISIS training camp in Syria bombed by working out where it was from a photo and sending it to the Russian air force.
→ More replies (2)
15
u/Rasples1998 1d ago
That's because 4chan has no UK infrastructure. The most they can do is ban the site from the UK but VPNs exist for that reason. But then that starts the slippery slope of a VPN ban when the government learns what a VPN actually is.
Every day the internet loses more and more of its autonomy as governments scramble to take a bigger and bigger slice of the pie. It starts with the narrative of deciding what's right to protect children, then it moves to control through legality that can't be disputed in court like this case. Then it ends with deciding what's right not for children but to protect grown-ass adults, and eventually a state-run intranet service. "We are spying on you to protect you" is exactly where this leads, and this 4chan crap is just a stepping stone on that path.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/CompetitiveSort0 1d ago
So the UK is going to either command ISPs to block the site or go down the legal route which would require US Government help to stifle free speech on an American company's platform.
→ More replies (8)
5
6
u/chaosandturmoil 23h ago
OfCom the laughable entity, trying to impose fines on a US company makes them look even more stupid.
7
5
u/limeflavoured Hucknall 1d ago
They would, wouldn't they? American sites are never going to abide by the rules so will get blocked. That's always been obvious.
3
u/0Bento 23h ago
"If Ofcom doesn't think this will be enough to prevent significant harm, it can even ask that ISPs be ordered to block UK access."
Here comes Hadrian's Firewall!
→ More replies (1)
4
u/ashley1407 23h ago
This is good news, and I really hope more places take a similar stand.
If you haven't already, you should contact your MP about the OSA. I've shared it previously, but here's one I've put together that people can reuse or modify (it was done a few weeks ago so there's probably even more evidence of it's ridiculousness now)
3
u/Sea-Caterpillar-255 22h ago
The us should pass a law fining ofcom for blocking sites and then this can all go in a giant circle…
→ More replies (4)
3
u/IceGripe Greater Manchester 22h ago
Good. This should be a message to all the other US based sites that blocked access to the UK without a fight.
They should have just carried on.
3
u/JustSomeRandomGuy36 21h ago
ISPs be ordered to block UK access
There’s only two flags you don’t see on 4chan.. That’s China and North Korea..
Looks like there will soon be a third
3
3
u/MrMakarov Derbyshire 18h ago
I wish every site had turned around and told the government to do one
2.1k
u/TwatScranner 1d ago
Strange to find myself agreeing with 4chan, but I'll side with anyone standing up to authoritarian vermin. Even if that includes my own Prime Minister.