Top
Best
New

Posted by iamnothere 8 hours ago

Ofcom concedes defeat in 4chan case(prestonbyrne.com)
276 points | 182 commentspage 2
gupti 5 hours ago|
I hope the precedent doesn't change to trying to enforce fines on foreign companies by instead arresting and fining employees upon arrival to the UK.

Though I guess we've already seen something similar in 2024 with France and Telegram...

not-kinsale-joe 6 hours ago||
It's annoying, in the UK you can browse 4chan but not Imgur
lukeify 3 hours ago||
We need to start collectively shaming individuals in the tech sector who work for these censorious government agencies and do their bidding.
mellosouls 3 hours ago||
Note this nonsense headline and article is just more puffery from the theatrical 4chan side and doesn't represent any official legal position.

Of course ofcom knows its power is limited, that shouldn't stop it attempting to do it's job, however much that job might irk foreign operators publishing to ofcoms jurisdiction.

The fact is the US has different standards to the UK. It doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong but it does mean that those differences will cause cultural and legal friction that responsible operators will attempt to diminish within reason, while others will attempt to capitalize for publicity.

weberer 2 hours ago|
[dead]
MisterMunchkin 5 hours ago||
Good, fuck off ofcom. We always mocked Chinese censorship but we’re not really any different now.
743947630229 3 hours ago||
[flagged]
TZubiri 7 hours ago||
does this mean the UK will block 4chan in the UK? if the defense is jurisdictional then 4chan can continue to serve US users, but there would be no recourse if the UK blocks it in their jurisdiction
miohtama 6 hours ago||
The UK ISPs already did this earlier. What Ofcom really wanted is to flex their muscle and kill 4chan because it represents Satan for them.

What Ofcom wants next is to make VPNs illegal.

crtasm 6 hours ago|||
Did they fully block it or just put it on the blocklists that you can turn off in your account settings?

https://www.blocked.org.uk/site/http://www.4chan.org suggests the latter to me, but the checks aren't very recent

miohtama 4 hours ago|||
Using a nationwide default blocklist to address 4chan would be appropriate behaviour for Ofcom, given its duty to protect kids.

Beyond that, it is just madness to try to control the US company or fine it. Going beyond this duty shows that not all biscuits are present at the afternoon tea.

It's not like Facebook, or anyone's personal life or business, depends on 4chan.

ryankrage77 6 hours ago|||
In my experience, ISPs just 'block' it at the DNS level. Using another DNS provider 'unblocks' everything.
TZubiri 1 hour ago||
This is my experience too, I don't know why they don't do IP level blocks. It's pretty trivial to evade a lot of bans.

I think the Spain-Cloudflare case does IP level blocks and it has a lot of side effect damage, but if I recall they do IP-block level blocking because the vendor, cloudflare, provides header/envelope encryption and pooling, so the Spanish courts considers it legal to block the whole service even, alleging that they are not collaborating with court orders, they just choose not to block the whole provider to reduce the collateral damage, even if they consider they have jurisdiction to block all of CF

miohtama 48 minutes ago||
Pirate streams have better access to public IP addresses than legitimate services, so blocking Cloudflare does nothing but destroy legitimate businesses.
pjc50 2 hours ago||||
It is not blocked in the UK.

I think OFCOM themselves recognize the problem with trying to ban VPNs, but extremely dim MPs and extremely angry newspapers (who are the underlying enemies of free speech here) don't.

EmbarrassedHelp 1 hour ago||
They only temporarily backed down on targeting VPNs, while also saying that online platforms should block all VPN users who don't verify their ages.
Bender 1 hour ago||
They will never stop trying. [1]

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vf2citudDA

tourmalinetaco 4 hours ago|||
4chan and Kiwi Farms, which is something the article intentionally glosses over. Honestly, KF is a far more “dangerous” place in the eyes of the UK government, as 4chan hasn’t been relevant for around a decade, and the combined efforts to deplatform KF traditionally has been fruitless.
whywhywhywhy 2 hours ago||
Why would they block it if they hope to get money from it.
draw_down 8 hours ago||
> American courts generally decline to enforce foreign judgments that violate the United States Constitution

Good grief. This is sad stuff.

drnick1 3 hours ago||
No, it's called sovereignty.
mahboi 6 hours ago|||
What else should happen in this case?
ImJamal 4 hours ago||
Are you saying it is sad that American courts do not enforce foreign laws if they violate the US constitution? If so, then are you in favor of Russian, Chinese, various Muslim countries' laws being enforced in the US?
chihuahua 4 hours ago|||
Iranian Fatwas enforced/carried out by American courts, that could get interesting.
deaux 4 hours ago||||
I think you meant to ask "are you in favor of the CLOUD Act and FACTA (among others) being enforced outside the US?"
yieldcrv 7 hours ago||
[flagged]
draw_down 6 hours ago|
[dead]
philipwhiuk 6 hours ago|
This was a fairly stupid case. Ofcom didn't try to enforce it abroad, 4chan sued Ofcom in case it did (mostly for PR purposes).

Ofcom knows its rulings don't apply internationally.

So yes, the status quo is enforced by the US courts, as if it was ever in doubt and nothing at all has changed.

Orygin 6 hours ago|
Didn't Ofcom send multiple threat letters to 4chan, requesting they comply with UK laws? That counts as trying to enforce it
tourmalinetaco 4 hours ago||
Yes. Ofcom sent multiple extortion letters to 4chan and Kiwi Farms, demanding they pay up and/or submit to British rule. Saying it was for “PR purposes” is equivalent to saying that reporting blackmail is for PR. GP also fails to understand that specifically US courts have no jurisdiction to stop international extortion, which is a loophole through the FSIA. For now, this creates a gridlock: the UK has no ability to seize assets from non-UK entities, but are free to fine and declare non-UK entities as in violation, which aids internal and even international pressure to censoring speech critical of the UK government. In response, US legislation is being proposed (GRANITE Act) that aims to close this loophole.
More comments...