Comment on The Ofcom Tea Party: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence, British regulator claims “sovereign immunity” to defend itself – and sovereign powers to regulate foreign companies

• borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  The part where they have any infrastructure, operations, revenue, or presence at all in the UK. They don’t, so the UK doesn’t have jurisdiction. This isn’t like the Apple stuff, where physical Apple products are being sold at retail in the EU/UK. UK residents are intentionally navigating to a website outside UK jurisdiction. If a UK resident goes to Mallorca on holiday, Spanish laws, not UK laws, apply because they’re in fucking Spain.

  Also you should probably click that About page on the linked blog dude. Unless some American just randomly wound up at UCL in 1988 then graduates, stayed in the UK, and got a job at UCW Aberystwyth, you might want to rethink the random bullshit you’re spouting off as fact lol.

  source

  • Keelhaul@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I feel like I am missing something reading your comments, but it seems pretty clear to me that they do do business in the UK. They have users in the UK, to which they are providing a service (the 4chan message boards) in exchange for eyes on adverts placed on the page (from which 4chan makes money).

    Just because this law is really stupid, and that 4chan does not have servers in the UK doesn’t really matter. UK laws can still be enforced for individuals in the UK (which is expressly what is stated in the message from ofcom). Ofcom is not demanding that age verification is implemented for all users world wide, but for UK users. 4Chan can decide to not comply (which I think is good), but then it is not surprising that if you keep doing business in the UK (not blocking UK users/IPs) that fines (which 4chan will just ignore as they are not UK based) and possible bans on your service in the UK follow.

    source

    • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      So as I understand it from conversations surrounding the USB-C stuff and other things the EU was trying to enforce on US headquartered companies, “doing business in” means the company has a registered subsidiary in that region, they have local payment processors, etc. So Meta does business in the EU or UK because they sell advertising space to businesses in those regions that target users in those regions, and the ad fees are paid to that local subsidiary through local payment processors.

      Ofcom is not demanding that age verification is implemented for all users world wide, but for UK users. 4Chan can decide to not comply (which I think is good), but then it is not surprising that if you keep doing business in the UK (not blocking UK users/IPs) that fines (which 4chan will just ignore as they are not UK based) and possible bans on your service in the UK follow.

      I think we’re on the same page. Ofcom can’t force 4chan to do anything, because they don’t have jurisdiction over 4chan. They can’t force 4chan to implement age verification, or to implement geoblocks. They can issue fines if they feel like it, but they’re uncollectible.

      So ultimately that’s what’s so ridiculous and goofy and annoying about all this shit. Ofcom is acting like foreign companies with no business operations in the UK are subject to its decisions. They are not. Ofcom should have never tried regulating entities it has no authority over, it just makes them look silly and naive.

      The UK has every right to restrict their own residents access to things that are illegal internally. Just like how they have customs controls at their physical borders to prevent illegal physical items from being imported, they should have just blocked 4chan off the rip instead of trying to fine them.

      source

      • Keelhaul@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        They can’t force 4chan to implement age verification, or to implement geoblocks. They can issue fines if they feel like it, but they’re uncollectible.

        The UK has every right to restrict their own residents access to things that are illegal internally. Just like how they have customs controls at their physical borders to prevent illegal physical items from being imported, they should have just blocked 4chan off the rip instead of trying to fine them.

        Yeah, reading this I think we are indeed on the same page.

        source
  • FelixCress@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    The part where they have any infrastructure, operations, revenue, or presence at all in the UK.

    Do you understand how the Internet is working? You don’t have to have an infrastructure in a country to be present there.

    USians need to get used to following the law. Shocking, I know.

    source

    • sorghum@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Yeah, I don’t think you really understand how the internet works. Their presence is in the country where their servers are. People from the UK essentially go to another country to visit 4chan. If the UK doesn’t like that the onus should be on them to block that access, but that is also a stupid idea thanks to VPNs.

      source

      • FelixCress@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Their income is derived from the UK users. They can either block the UK traffic (which they don’t want as it would mean less money) or engage with the regulator regarding harmful contents they have been fined for:

        The controversial online forum 4chan risks being blocked in the UK after refusing to pay a fine from Ofcom for breaking [rules set by the Online Safety Act]).

        The website, which hosts adult content, was handed a £20,000 for failing to share information about the risk of illegal content on its platform.

        Media watchdog Ofcom said action would be taken against companies that “flagrantly fails to engage with Ofcom and their duties under the Online Safety Act”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Are you seriously trying to say that if you have a website, no matter where it’s hosted and what you are hosting, you are subject to the laws of EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY that has internet access?

      Here’s a text picture of Muhammad lying down: O<–<

      Are the admins of lemmy.world now subject to being put to death in Somalia? Under Somali law, that is blasphemy and punishable by death.

      source

      • FelixCress@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        If you have users and derive income from a country, you are operating in this country. This is not a difficult concept as tech giants found out after EU fined multiple of them.

        source
    • zarniwoop@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Admittedly you’re halfway decent as a troll. Got a few people.

      source