551–560 of 817 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
4chan is not "operating in the UK". They accept and respond to packets from the UK. If the UK government doesn't like this, they can block 4chan themselves.
That's serving UK users while knowing that they aren't legally allowed to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I personally think that FB, Uber, RBNB, Oracle, Google, Amazon, and literally every american SASS should be completely forbidden from Europe. Period no discussion at all. Given the state of current America, given the reactions even on this very post that do not see how Cambridge Analytics has damaged the entire world - yes, I think it would be safe to put a good 10 year ban on every US web tech. It would fasten up Eu…
Its cute that you think Europe has the ability to replace those services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US-UK Mutual Legal Assistance treaty imposes obligations on Ofcom which they have not met, 4chan claims: “None of these actions constitutes valid service under the US-UK Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, United States law or any other proper international legal process.” https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71209929/1/4chan-commun...
MLAT applies only to a narrow set of legal procedures, essentially around criminal activity. I’m a lawyer but this is very specialist stuff. I’m not expert enough to opine on whether MLAT applies here but - simply judging by the quality of their respective legal work on display - I’m minded to believe that Ofcom knows what they are doing. OTOH 4chan’s rhetoric reeks of FUD.
This is nerd sniping of a different sort. I’m guessing they are aiming to drum up American sentiment for their actions, and because its 4chan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically yes, but arresting US citizens will have implications and you can expect the us will protest via diplomatic channels. It is very unlikely UK is interested in that. Not that countries don't prosicute laws for crimes outsiden of their border, but the bar for what they will is higher.
The bar for British is arresting old ladies saying nasty things online, so practically their bar is already gone.
> The Act explicitly grants Ofcom the legal authority to regulate online safety for individuals in the United Kingdom, and this expressly includes conducting investigations into, and imposing penalties for, non-compliance by providers of online services with their duties under the Act. […] The Act expressly anticipates that it will have extra-territorial effect I don't see anything wrong here: Sure, Ofcom can have th…
Look at this page: https://www.4chan.org/advertise It explicitly says that 7% of their users are coming from UK. If UK blocks them, they will loose noticeable part of advertising revenue. If there was no money at stake, they could just ignore Ofcom and sleep well. But they appear to be very agitated about the fact that they may loose their second biggest market. Honestly, I don’t understand anyone on 4chan side here:…
it's worse than china's firewall
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's serving UK users while knowing that they aren't legally allowed to.
How many other laws can I passively break in other countries I have no connection to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bar for British is arresting old ladies saying nasty things online, so practically their bar is already gone.
The were arrested for encouraging people to burn down hotels with people inside… they went to prison because they pleaded guilty to racial hatred offences
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not what the text means, but even if it did, you cornered yourself, since if you have no particular care for UK users, you won't care if they are blocked from your general service.
Blocking UK users from your service does not put you out of scope of OSA, according to Ofcom. 4 days ago: > "Services who choose to restrict access rather than protect UK users remain on our watchlist "
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really that easily? Generally, only the legal agent for the private company will know and the direct hires of the board i.e. the CEO/CTO/whoever they name up top. Sometimes board of directors can get named in court records but with the public records redacted. But outside of that? Not even the IRS knows unless the directors get compensation. MI6 would have to commit a few physical in person crimes to get any deta…
Honestly I'm surprised to learn that 4chan has a board of directors.