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

IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

prestonbyrne.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 418 posts

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#121

Post by beejiu »

gethly wrote: post #95

Sounds like UK problem to me. No one can be expected to know or abide laws of another country. In person or in the digital realm. If UK has some laws, then UK citizens should abide them, not the rest of the world. In other words, say betting is illegal in UK and I as a UK citizen go and make a bet via website that is run by a business in Panama. The Panamanian company should not concern itself with anything but rathe…

> No one can be expected to know or abide laws of another country.

If this is your view, do not travel or do business in other countries. It's simple.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#122

Post by vitus »

holbrad wrote: post #89
vitus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The combative stance that he's taking really doesn't do him any favors in resolving the issue. Lawyer: "I've confirmed that at least one UK IP address is blocked." Regulators: "We've confirmed that at least one UK IP address is not blocked." In what world is the correct response "Dear regulators, you're incompetent. Pound sand." instead of "Can you share the IP address you used so my client can address this in their…

I this is exactly how you should respond to outrageous demands. The UK should pound sand.

I get that it's satisfying to tell them to go away because they're being unreasonable. But what's the legal strategy here? Piss off the regulators such that they really won't drop this case, and give them fodder to be able to paint the lawyer and his client as uncooperative?

Is the strategy really just "get new federal laws passed so UK can't shove these regulations down our throats"? Is that going to happen on a timeline that makes sense for this specific case?

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#123

Post by mlhpdx »

iamnothere wrote: post #119
aDyslecticCrow wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I'm operating a Web site in country A, I should not have to care about country B's laws Not defending UK's idiotic laws, but this doesn't hold. If you cannot regulate websites outside of the country of origin, then no internet regulation can hold for any subject. Openly selling stolen personal credentials or botnet usage? Piracy? Reselling personal information without disclosure? So there are effectively three o…

If country B doesn’t like it, block the site in question. You’re not going to extradite US site operators, period. Find another approach.

That’s what they’re doing

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#124

Post by Hizonner »

aDyslecticCrow wrote: post #111
Hizonner wrote: post #55

You shouldn't even be expected to geoblock. If I'm operating a Web site in country A, I should not have to care about country B's laws unless I am taking specific action intended to attract users in country B in particular . That's doesn't mean just to target the whole world, either. If you don't want your citizens to access something in another country, take it up with your citizens. It was obvious from the minute t…

> If I'm operating a Web site in country A, I should not have to care about country B's laws Not defending UK's idiotic laws, but this doesn't hold. If you cannot regulate websites outside of the country of origin, then no internet regulation can hold for any subject. Openly selling stolen personal credentials or botnet usage? Piracy? Reselling personal information without disclosure? So there are effectively three o…

> no internet regulation can hold for any subject

No Internet regulation can hold extraterritorially. You leave out the obvious and most important case: the country where the Web site or whatever is located enforcing its own laws. Which is actually how all law has mostly worked from day one.

> Openly selling stolen personal credentials or botnet usage? Piracy? Reselling personal information without disclosure?

If you find a jurisdiction where those are all legal, then I guess you just have to block your citizens from reaching it, or punish them if they do. Not particularly tricky.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#125

Post by HPsquared »

landl0rd wrote: post #86
mlhpdx wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t agree that choosing to host a website without limiting the audience is innocent. It’s a choice, and has been the default for a long time, but it means one has chosen to speak outside the borders of their own country and that comes with rules, like them or not.

No, one has chosen to make something available for contact within one country. One is not actively himself reaching across borders to do so. One cannot reasonably be required to take any affirmative action to fulfill the whims of a foreign government. Also, Britain isn't important enough to make this stick against e.g. an American. If someone writes me a letter asking a question about material that is prohibited in h…

The client requests content from a server. The server may be abroad. It's the same as ordering goods from abroad, only much faster. I wonder what the law is for importing goods that are illegal in the destination country.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#126

Post by beejiu »

brookst wrote: post #106
beejiu wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems reasonable. If I committed what is considered a crime on American soil, I wouldn't expect to be able to enter the US without arrest.

Even if it was legal in your own country? That seems odd.

Yes, and this already happens, every day.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#127

Post by Hizonner »

crtasm wrote: post #74
holowoodman wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In what world is the correct response "Dear regulators, you're incompetent. Pound sand." instead of "Can you share the IP address you used so my client can address this in their geoblock?" That would imply that the client actually would like to be contacted every time Ofcom found a leak in the geoblock. Not a good idea imho.

It sounds like they would welcome that, e.g. in the update to the post >They’re definitely not treating it like a public safety matter, where they know how to reach us and know that I generally respond within the hour.

They don't agree that it is a public safety matter, or at least they've clearly taken the position that they don't care about that kind of public safety.

He's just pointing out that Ofcom's behavior is inconsistent with Ofcom sincerely believing it's a public safety matter either.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#128

Post by Hizonner »

mlhpdx wrote: post #80

Isn’t compliance just as easy as asking where the visitor is from (or more specifically if they are from or in the UK), perhaps even just once per IP they visit the site from? Yes, they may lie, but that’s their problem not the site operator’s.

There's no sign that Ofcom wouldn't want to treat user lies as the site's problem. I suspect they would.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#129

Post by spacebanana7 »

youngNed wrote: post #49
spacebanana7 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in Reform, I get the sense that Zia Yusuf was the only person campaigning seriously against it. Going on a one man crusade to force Farage to criticise it and put fully repealing the act on their manifesto.

It was a Reform politician who championed it in: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0004... WITH A RAP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ql6tGu9aWg https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=r4mRo2M5VMA

Yeah they really shouldn’t have let Nadine Dorris into the party. For the sake of online freedom, thankfully Zia outranks her (as she holds no official position) but even so it’s not an ideal situation.

Re: IP blocking the UK is not enough to comply with the Online Safety Act

#130

Post by iamnothere »

mlhpdx wrote: post #123
iamnothere wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If country B doesn’t like it, block the site in question. You’re not going to extradite US site operators, period. Find another approach.

That’s what they’re doing

No, they are making threats about the site in country A while the site has voluntarily blocked all of country B, with country B saying that this isn’t enough, despite the operators in country A being out of jurisdiction and making an effort to comply regardless. Country B is basically saying that the site in country A is not allowed on the internet at all.
Post reply on HN