Top
Best
New

Posted by mosura 4 hours ago

4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches(www.bbc.com)
93 points | 70 comments
dijit 1 hour ago|
The response from Ofcom doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

If you are to sell a toy in the UK you must be a British company. (and must pay VAT and comply with British safety standards).

If a consumer buys from overseas and imports a product then they do not have British consumer protections. Which is why so much aliexpress electrical stuff is dangerous (expecially USB chargers) yet it continues to be legally imported.

Just, no british retailer would be allowed to carry it without getting a fine.

3rodents 19 minutes ago||
That’s not really true. The Ofcom representative said “not allowed” not “unable to”. Even if cocaine is legal in my country, I’m “not allowed” to sell it to British consumers by the power of the British authorities. The British authorities may not have legal authority in my jurisdiction but they can take action in their own, including issuing penalties and stopping my deliveries at the border.
oliwarner 10 minutes ago||
But if a Brit comes to your country and buys cocaine from you, in person, you wouldn't expect to be convicted as a dealer in the UK.

Ofcom has a bad handle on web requests. Clients connect out. 4chan et al aren't pushing their services in anyone in the UK.

3rodents 6 minutes ago||
If we want to base the argument on technical nuance, 4chan are sending their packets to the U.K. just as the cocaine dealer would be sending packets (of cocaine) to their buyers in the U.K.
tokyobreakfast 1 hour ago|||
The US CBP routinely intercepts "dangerous" products. I assume the Brits have the same.

It's a wonder why AliExpress flies under the radar. I assume it's impossible to keep up with it all.

The UK's comically over-engineered electrics are no match for some of these plug-in-and-die sketchy USB chargers from the Far East.

DiodesGoneWild on YouTube does teardowns of many of these incredibly poorly constructed deathtraps.

strideashort 3 minutes ago|||
And by extension, the UK is free to implement His Majesty’s Greatest Firewall of the UK should they wish to control what is imported.
refulgentis 36 minutes ago|||
Commenting on Europe has gotten really lax the last year or so. People kinda will just say whatever pops into their head and it’s some drive-by claim that they haven’t thought about for a second past it popping into their head, presumably because it’s become normalized. (i.e. “but everyone knows Europe goes too far”)

Sometimes it self resolves - as you contributed here, yes, countries limit and interfere and fine other countries businesses, all the time!

I don’t know what yours means though. What electrics are made in the UK? How are they over engineered?

tokyobreakfast 25 minutes ago||
Are you having a mini-stroke?
refulgentis 12 minutes ago|||
What do you mean?

I’m at +4, so, I’m doubting it’s unreadable…

cookiengineer 19 minutes ago|||
> Are you having a mini-stroke?

This comment is comically pointless.

crtasm 1 hour ago|||
Is it correct to say the consumer is importing a product when it's aliexpress shipping it to them?
helsinkiandrew 23 minutes ago|||
Particularly if AliExpress is paying local VAT and import taxes (or at least dealing with the import paperwork) or even less if it’s from one of their local (UK/EU etc) warehouses
nvme0n1p1 43 minutes ago||||
Of course. What situation are you imagining where a country imports a product without the seller shipping the product to that country?
reisse 1 hour ago||||
Unless AliExpress has a local entity, like they do in some countries, yes.
john_strinlai 55 minutes ago||||
yes, aliexpress would not be shipping it if the consumer did not order it.
john_strinlai 1 hour ago||
>However, a lawyer representing the company - which has previously said it won't pay such fines - has responded to the demand with an AI-generated cartoon image of a hamster.

>The latest image is not the first picture of a hamster lawyers for 4chan have sent in reply to Ofcom

amazing. same energy as the pirate bay telling dreamworks to sodomize themselves. i cant help but laugh at the absurdness of it.

aydyn 21 minutes ago|
Unlike TPB founders who were convicted in 2009 because copyright infringement also violates swedish law, the 4chan lawyers are correct that they are breaking no U.S. law. 1A provides broad protections.
gadders 53 minutes ago||
If it wasn't for 4Chan, we might never have solved the Haruhi problem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpermutation#Lower_bounds,...

I used to go on a curated version of 4Chan via Telegram. Yes there is a lot of racism (although it flies in every direction, between every ethnicity you could imagine) but there is also (due to the anonymous nature) some genuinely interesting discussions. I remember one thread about aircraft carriers being of no use being debated by US and UK submarine officers.

There are also some genuinely funny bits. There was a guy in Greece who had found out that as long as he never graduated, he could live a basic life for free at university. His nickname was Dormogenes.

john_strinlai 51 minutes ago|
there is a great clickhole headline that your comment reminds me of

"Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point"

4chan has produced some hilarious/interesting stuff, and they have also driven people to suicide. i suppose it is up to everyone individually to make the value judgement there.

nvme0n1p1 41 minutes ago||
Replace "4chan" with "humanity in general" and your statement still holds true.
john_strinlai 37 minutes ago||
sure, yeah, the original quote was about a person instead of a website, so that makes sense.
jmkni 4 minutes ago||
Getting flashbacks to the letters the Pirate Bay used to send lawyers

https://www.scribd.com/document/117922444/the-pirate-bay-res...

I'm pretty sure in one they responded saying their lawyer was alseep in a ditch and would reply when he woke up lol

VladVladikoff 16 minutes ago||
The letter sent by the lawyer in response: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HDwtXYaWAAA-u0l?format=jpg&name=...
rconti 1 hour ago||
> "Companies – wherever they're based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the UK. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different," she said.

So the UK plans to fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to British under-18s in France on holiday?

Aloisius 8 minutes ago||
I'm not sure one needs to stretch the analogy this far.

If someone from the UK calls me on the phone and I start reading them posts on 4chan, is the UK going to fine me too?

ceejayoz 1 hour ago|||
This is more like the UK fining Parisian bars that courier alcohol to under-18s in the UK.
strideashort 14 minutes ago|||
Not exactly.

It’s like fining Parisian bars to hand over alcohol to couriers without checking to whom couriers will deliver it.

Couriers = all involved network providers.

tsukikage 1 hour ago||||
More like the UK fining US porn publishers for not stopping British kids searching through the hedges in their street
shrubble 1 hour ago||||
It’s a lot more like banning the importation of books and newspapers that the government doesn’t agree with…
shaky-carrousel 1 hour ago|||
Which is equally absurd.
OJFord 1 hour ago||
No it isn't? Real example is Amazon, a US company that sells alcohol in the UK, and is required to check age on order & delivery.
qup 1 hour ago||
Amazon is an international corporation with UK-incorporated entities.
OJFord 1 hour ago||
That's true but not relevant to the spirit of the point.
ronsor 1 hour ago||
It is relevant. There's a material difference between shipping material overseas and shipping it (and handling it) within the destination country.

If someone mails $ProhibitedItem at a USPS to the UK, then it's the job of local UK police and/or customs to reject the parcel if it is prohibited. It's the UK's problem, de facto if not de jure, because the sender is out of reach.

If someone with a UK subsidiary and local processing center mails $ProhibitedItem to their center and delivers it to someone in the UK, then that's more than the UK's problem.

OJFord 1 hour ago|||
In theory the children are committing a crime yes, but obviously enforcement is extremely low; left mainly to their teachers.

I don't think UK law governs foreign companies' overseas operations based on the nationality of the customer though, no.

dijit 1 hour ago|||
They’re not breaking any law.

Laws apply to actions in the country, they’re not based on citizenship.

If you go to Amsterdam and sleep with a hooker, you didn’t break a law by doing that: despite prostitution (specifically purchasing sex) being illegal in many western countries.

cjbgkagh 1 hour ago|||
That’s not always true, and increasingly less so, particularly the Australians and the crime of child sex tourism. I am sure it’ll be expanded to hate crimes and disturbing the peace laws as well and from there used as a political cudgel to suppress opposition to government policies. At least for now you have to be a citizen of the country but the UK has stated an intention to extradite US citizens for online hate crimes.
dec0dedab0de 1 hour ago||||
Countries do have laws that apply even when you leave the country. For example, Americans living abroad still have to pay taxes.
dijit 1 hour ago||
Extraterritorial taxation is extremely rare; and its less of a law and more of a “cost of citizenship” since you’re allowed to get rid of it.
pearlsontheroad 1 hour ago|||
afaik, prostitution is either legal or partially legal on the majority of Western countries.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...

dijit 1 hour ago||
Normally its considered legal to sell but not legal to buy.

Prostitution is primarily conducted by women, and this is a way for them to still seek protection and healthcare while still technically criminalising the practice.

rjsw 1 hour ago||
France can fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to under-18s itself.
mrtksn 4 minutes ago||
Europeans are following the wrong path on regulating the internet. Instead of calling it internet safety and annoy people, they should just make those services and the people running them liable for the damages.

The same goes for the freedom of speech. Europeans should make it legal guarantee instead of trying to build walls around speech. So when X or 4Chan etc deletes a post that, it may lead to freedom of speech fines if deletion wasn't justified. Tha same for the algorithm, if a post that doesn't break the rules is discriminated by the algorithm, a hefty fine should apply.

Suddenly we will have companies that keep their business clean and no claim for moral high ground.

internet2000 1 hour ago||
Let kids go to 4chan. I frequented it and turned out fine.
patates 1 hour ago||
I used to hang out there too. However, describing me as 'fine' would require a lengthy debate over definitions.
throwpoaster 1 hour ago|||
The problem is you're getting downvoted by the people who didn't.
akramachamarei 1 hour ago||
Bold to assume downvoters vote on first-hand knowledge.
sayYayToLife 12 minutes ago||
[dead]
patates 1 hour ago||
It would be marvelous if they used a drawing of a spider.

https://27bslash6.com/overdue.html

ChrisArchitect 3 minutes ago|
Related:

Ofcom has today fined 4chan £450k for not having age checks in place

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47442838

More comments...