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

351–360 of 418 posts

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

#351

Post by nathanlied »

anywerds wrote: post #348
Danjoe4 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK knows their place. They could do that but they won't. Also, they'll have trouble even finding who the business operator is. The US allows pseudonymous business structures and their subpoena request will be thrown out on a 1st amendment defense.

I can only imagine the storm that would emerge if the morning the UK ever attempted to arrest an American for self-expression inside or outside the USA. That is how you get some Democracy delivered.

Just the UK? Not, say, Iran? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._White_(U.S._veteran...

Or maybe China, for a US citizen who posted while on US soil, in a US website? https://www.reuters.com/world/exclusive-american-barred-leav...

Seems a little inconsistent, this delivery of Democracy.

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

#352

Post by tomhow »

fukka42 wrote: post #180
gtrevorjay wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

> I understand it's difficult for you as an American

Can you please not post abusive comments like this to HN? We're looking for curious conversation here. We ban accounts that comment like this repeatedly. Please read the guidelines and make an effort to observe them in future https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#353

Post by 13415 »

crazydoggers wrote: post #188
13415 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Ofcom are motivated by "concern for individuals well beings in the midst of a mental health crisis", but even then, it is clear in the context of the current discussion that they should be concerned with enforcing their legislation in their own country. The UK is free to build The Great Firewall of the United Kingdom and block half of the internet if their concern is so great. What they cannot be allowed to d…

> I doubt Ofcom are motivated by "concern for individuals well beings in the midst of a mental health crisis" Do you have evidence for that? Because when I search I do see them doing investigations concerned with abuse of people including mentioning coercive and controlling behaviors https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-c... > If all of them followed a policy like UK's Ofcom, the internet would…

It's not a fallacy since there is nothing special or noteworthy about the UK. If every other country sent out such letters, then you'd have to block every country except your own. That's a fact. There are 195 countries in the world, no law office could possibly ensure you're complying with the laws of all of these countries within your own country. The laws are not even consistent, for example you violate the EU's GDPR by complying with Ofcom's demands. The UK's behavior sets a bad precedent that other small countries might follow. It's already enough having to keep up with US and EU regulatory demands, and we have to, since these are markets we can't ignore. Even just a few more small countries coming up with demands like Ofcom could create insurmountable legal problems for small companies like ours.

Let me put it another way: Would you comply with a similar letter from North Korea? From Russia? From China? If not, your attitude is hypocritical and inconsistent.

We're taking those threat seriously and have decided to block all UK IP numbers and not to do business with the UK for the time being. News that Ofcom might ignore such measures are worrying to us.

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

#354

Post by mjlee »

hunterpayne wrote: post #287
Hizonner wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, no, it attempts to compel foreign banks, which may not even have a presence in the US, to disclose information about US citizens, using various threats. It doesn't threaten to throw foreigners in jail , but it does threaten to use US government "clout" against them... and the actors it's trying to put obligations on are absolutely not US citizens.

Funny how you make tax evasion and money laundering on par with political speech. Fighting for your rights to be corrupt is a pretty weird take. If we can talk someone into doing what we want, that's perfectly legal as long as we or they aren't violating any laws. And nobody complains because getting dirty banks to spill is in everyone's best interests. Remember how happy everyone was at all the FIFA corruption data…

Plenty of honest and law-abiding Americans living abroad have a hard time banking because of this law. Many banks simply won't accept American citizens as clients. Even those that will let you open a current account won't let you have anything more complex.

Just one example: https://help.revolut.com/help/wealth/stocks/licences-regulat...

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

#355

Post by BeFlatXIII »

vessenes wrote: post #149
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…

Preston talks about this in an earlier blog post. It's a matter of UK law and, I'd bet, many countries, that they have the sovereign right to legislate about matters in and outside their borders. "If Parliament says smoking in Paris is illegal, it is illegal." What's different today than when that doctrine was conceived of is: data goes everywhere, communications are decentralized, international cooperation around es…

> nations to enforce their own rules outside their own borders by treaty

More democratically-elected legislatures ought to say, “We don't give a shit about what our predecessors agreed to.” when it comes to treaties requiring restrictions on their own citizens.

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

#356

Post by BeFlatXIII »

Svip wrote: post #308
jmward01 wrote: post #279

Let's start with a bang. Passports and strictly enforced borders are dumb and this is a clear example of exactly why. Increasingly the digital world -is- the world and arbitrary geographical boundaries are causing nothing but problems. We are taking the ideas of physical borders and passports and, badly, applying that broken idea to a virtual space with typical results. It blows me away that the real problem with str…

With the invention of steam ships, railways, aeroplanes and the automobile; travel became almost trivial. In conjunction with those inventions, states also became a lot more involved in people's lives; culminating in large welfare states. 3-4 centuries ago, a state did not care much about who lived in in their territory; these days, they are likely to provide them benefits, and have certain obligations according to i…

Thank you for speaking truth about the railroad (and superhighway) problem.

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

#357

Post by jen20 »

swores wrote: post #299
jen20 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> collect money from UK citizens This is quite obviously incorrect. I am a UK citizen, but live in the US. No company needs a UK presence to collect money from me.

And to be clear, that’s still true for selling services online to UK citizens who are also UK residents, it’s not a quirk of you having moved away from the UK - it’s just not true that you need a legal presence in the UK to serve customers from the UK.

Indeed, I also believe that to be the case but went with the trivial counterexample! Probably best to be explicit though.

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

#358

Post by [deleted] »

hilbert42 wrote: post #274
Hizonner wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a matter of UK law and, I'd bet, many countries, that they have the sovereign right to legislate about matters in and outside their borders. Basically all countries take that position legally. But there are norms and customs about how often you exercise it (as well as practical questions of power). Extraterritorial regulation of Web sites is unfortunately in the process of being established as normal, but it's…

"Extraterritorial regulation of Web sites is unfortunately in the process of being established as normal, but it's a bad norm." Perhaps "Extraterritorial regulation" is bad wording. A country can regulate whether an extraterritorial website is distributed and or viewed within its borders but it has no legal authority force another country to close down a website that's operating legally within its jurisdiction. The o…

[deleted]

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

#359

Post by vintermann »

hunterpayne wrote: post #197
vessenes wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preston talks about this in an earlier blog post. It's a matter of UK law and, I'd bet, many countries, that they have the sovereign right to legislate about matters in and outside their borders. "If Parliament says smoking in Paris is illegal, it is illegal." What's different today than when that doctrine was conceived of is: data goes everywhere, communications are decentralized, international cooperation around es…

Ok, but I feel like the UK government hasn't thought this matter through. Think about what happens if the US decides it can enforce US law on UK soil against UK citizens. The main industry of the UK is questionable international finance using legal fictions on various islands. What happens when the US decides that that shouldn't be happening anymore? Its the same logic OfCom is using here. And unlike the UK governmen…

They have thought about it. They're betting on a global turn towards censorship and opinion control. "One hour before your time - no more!"

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

#360

Post by [deleted] »

scott_w wrote: post #325
kassner wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the case he’s making is that not even Ofcom knows, because it has nothing to do with the block itself. They want to make a scene, however possible.

You can’t infer that from the statement posted. In fact, all Ofcom have done is say they’re investigating. Do you expect a regulatory body to not investigate a report from a serious suicide prevention charity? In addition, such an inference flies in the face of the fact that Ofcom have sent staff to conferences for pornographic websites to talk to them about compliance: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/sep/21…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN