Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 936 posts

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#211

Post by LAC-Tech »

LaurensBER wrote: post #155
mrtksn wrote: post #148

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, it may lead to freedom of speech fines…

I agree but you have to understand that a lot of European (leaders) still have WW2 in the back of their head. For them there're far worse things than giving up some freedoms. One can agree or disagree with this but Europe's actions are far more understandable if you see where they're coming from. From what it's worth, the younger generation doesn't seem to see this the same way so whatever censure Europe introduces t…

I agree but you have to understand that a lot of European (leaders) still have WW2 in the back of their head.

Then they do not understand how or why WWII started. Few people are really interested or care about this - it's treated more as a kind of Aesopian Fable than a historical event.

I am more cynical than you however, I suspect the Eurocrats who use WWII as a censorship justification know full well it has nothing to do with WWII.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#212

Post by strictnein »

kasperni wrote: post #97
ecshafer wrote: post #39

UK fining an American company for this is absurd. 4Chan isn't breaking any laws. You can make it illegal for your own citizens but you can't regulate a foreign business. UK citizens should fight for the right to free speech though.

How is this different than, for example, the US fining TikTok? https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-ftc-record-fine-childrens...

I mean, first and foremost, Tiktok has offices in the US and employees thousands of people here.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#213

Post by otherme123 »

oliwarner wrote: post #140
3rodents wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

It is easier than that: in Germany for example swastikas are forbidden. But they don't prosecute or fine web pages served in other countries. Or books for that matter. In some countries communist symbology is prohibited, yet they don't fine US web pages for having them. And don't forget the Great Firewall: China blocks pages, and get along with some webs to tune what they serve. But you can publish Tiananmen massacre images in your european hosted web, and they don't fine you: it is their problem to limit access, and they understand it.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#214

Post by Ajedi32 »

3rodents wrote: post #146
oliwarner wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

This isn't a physical product. A better analogy would be a phone call, initiated by someone in the UK to a foreign country.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#215

Post by greycol »

soco wrote: post #154
kimixa wrote: post #134

People here seem to be thinking this a UK/Europe-specific phenomenon, but there's plenty of examples of the US "seizing" sites that were never hosted in the USA either, and even put pressure on countries to extradite people involved even if they never broke any laws in the country they're living in. One I remember was a site hosting streams of the 2022 football world cup. Or a number of Iranian-affiliated news sites…

I think people here are also more fond of 4chan than the average citizen, and also in general rather fond of technological freedom of anything. Makes sense, being players basically in the team about to get a red card. Like it or not, the global internet became a convenient way to skirt local laws and I don't see any reason why exempting something in one place only because it originated in some other place. Is now enf…

Of course, because they're not proposing "apply our laws in our country" they are proposing "apply our laws in another country". If you want to enforce this law you need to do it the CCP way (punish your ISPs for alllowing it into the country and monitor your citizens for accessing it) because you don't have the jurisdiction to enforce it otherwise. Let's not forget how many UK criminals have made fun of Kim Jong Un's haircut and are getting away with it because the UK is such a lawless place that doesn't enforce DPRK law.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#216

Post by anigbrowl »

3rodents wrote: post #192
miohtama wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends. If it causes anxiety to someone, it is illegal. Pictures of drugs could fall into this category. > Current law allows for restrictions on threatening or abusive words or behaviour intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace, sending another any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety, https://en.wikipedia.org/…

I don't wish to fall down the rabbit hole of trying to defend U.K. laws so I'll keep this short. You're being intellectually dishonest. That page does not back up your assertion. You have said "If it causes anxiety to someone, it is illegal" but the page says "intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress" which has a different meaning.

This is a meaningless standard since anyone can claim they were alarmed or distressed and there's no way to invalidate such a subjective claim. I can say I'm alarmed by your comment, does that mean it's valid for Ofcom to fine you?

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#218

Post by phendrenad2 »

We really need a Statesternet. People will be able to verify their identity to buy a special device which will encrypt/decrypt their traffic, and people in the UK will not be able to purchase one. The device will use GPS to confirm that it's only operating in the US.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#219

Post by umpalumpaaa »

deaddodo wrote: post #52
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #5

4chan's lawyer's response: "In the only country in which 4chan operates, the United States, it is breaking no law and indeed its conduct is expressly protected by the First Amendment."[0] [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c624330lg1ko

As shown in that same article, they also responded: >>> "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. "The UK is setting new standards for online safety. Age checks and risk assessments are cornerstones of our laws, and we'll…

Well the US government / prosecutors go after people who break their laws all the time… eg. Kim .Com, etc

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#220

Post by LAC-Tech »

michaelt wrote: post #209
DevKoala wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds so gross. Why do British people tolerate that? It’s as if British people belong to their government.

The people who think incest porn should be banned are loud and proud in their beliefs. They’ll put up posters, tell their MPs, respond to surveys, and appear in political debates. The people who support incest porn are a lot less talkative. As such our windsock government with no strong beliefs does what the survey says is most popular.

The people who think incest porn should be banned are loud and proud in their beliefs. They’ll put up posters, tell their MPs, respond to surveys, and appear in political debates.

The people who support incest porn are a lot less talkative.

I think there is an argument to made the pornography in general is harmful.

But to single out one single type of porn strikes me as... very odd. Maybe politicians can list, explicitly, all the other porn genres they find acceptable or agreeable to them, as a kind of compare and contrast exercise.

Post reply on HN