State Department confirms federal censorship shield law incoming(prestonbyrne.com) |
State Department confirms federal censorship shield law incoming(prestonbyrne.com) |
As is often the case, important defense mechanisms feel awful when they arise in the course of the worst people defending the worst people. They're still important defense mechanisms, and the UK's badly misnamed "Online Safety Act" (which will make people less safe) needs to die and never come back. But still, ugh.
If America wants to pressure countries over their extra-territorial enforcement of censorship laws it should repeal its taxation requirements of Americans not living in America.
They're not exactly involved in the process.
"Precedent"?
The claim that this UK action is an attack on the US First Amendment is absurd. That amendment is merely a limitation on the powers of Congress, and is irrelevant to the powers of the UK.
The logical response to non- compliance with your country's regulations is simply to block them. 4chan probably won't care, but that's what will keep the bigger players like X and Meta engaged in some way. They won't want to be cut off from the European market, and a precedent set that 'non-awful' governments are justified to block them.
Of course, all this a month after the US invaded another country to snatch their president and his wife to put them on trial for US "crimes" they supposedly committed while not in the US and while not being Americans abroad. I wonder if the murdering of ~100 people in that operation is a crime there that those on the US would be expected to answer for \s. It's all so stupidly rich.
(Satire but on a serious note, there are so many wtf moments happening right now where one gets concerned where the world is headed at this point from UK,US and many other countries having these dystopian actions from what I can tell)
Really? Where and when?
> 12/4/2025: Ofcom writes to 4chan again, claiming it is “expanding its investigation” into the site for not age-verifying its users. Ofcom explains that although it is “a UK-based regulator… that does not mean the rules do not apply to sites based abroad.”
Edit: after reading through the legal correspondences, it looks like Ofcom has been trying to get 4chan to produce cooperate with its investigation into whether or not it complies with the UK's Online Safety Act. 4chan didn't respond to the first two inquiries from Ofcom, so Ofcom has been attempting to fine them according to the Act.
All? I think not.
"The Act only requires that services take action to protect users in the UK - it does not require them to protect users anywhere else in the world. The measures that Ofcom recommends providers take to comply with their duties only relate to the design or operation of the service in the UK or as it affects UK users."
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-c...
They sound like abusive partners of the "you're confused, I'm doing this for your own good" variety. It must have taken real discipline, resisting the urge to add an "or else" somewhere, perhaps a few iterations of "I'm going to marry you someday, Lorraine!"
No I am not. I've verified those statements against the Online Safety Act itself.
Please feel free to substantiate your suggestion they are "blatant lies and spin".
And all that is leaving aside that the claimed aims of "protecting UK users" are confirmed false, in legal filings: https://bsky.app/profile/tupped.bsky.social/post/3lwgcmswmy2...
OK, so you are disputing Ofcom's: "The measures that Ofcom recommends providers take to comply with their duties only relate to the design or operation of the service in the UK or as it affects UK users".
Feel free to show even one Ofcom demand that goes beyond service to UK users only.