Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
71–80 of 97 posts
Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#72Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#73Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#74Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they want their assets, they will have to use U.S courts to get them and U.S courts will refuse to enforce British law that violates the first amendment. It's pretty simple actually. If they had assets in Britain, then they could get to them, but they don't.
They can just treat 4chan as malware server or a drug cartel. There exist sanction mechanisms against foreign entities that do not use local law enforcement in which case opinion of US courts will be irrelevant.
What sanction methods are you thinking of that could get to US citizens on US soil without US governmental consent?
Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#76[flagged]
Why has this hysterical hyperbole become the norm when discussing the UK? It feels like a prolonged disinformation attack.
Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#77Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serving ads to UK users does not grant the UK enforcement jurisdiction over 4chan. They have no presence, assets, or agents in the UK. If the UK still attempts to issue a judgement contrary to the first amendment, the constitution in general, and/or US law, it will not be recognized by US courts. In short, the UK can kick rocks.
the UK could block access to 4chan, or block the ability for 4chan to sell ads in the UK
Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me that response seems ridiculous in several ways. If they think that UK law doesn't apply to them (which seems very credible) why react at all? Describing what Ofcom is doing, which is, as far as I can tell, just doing the job it was set up to do, as "illegal"? Suggesting that 4chan has some connection to "technology firms"? If they were going to write anything at all, how about "I fart in your general direction"…
> If they think that UK law doesn't apply to them (which seems very credible) why react at all? If I get a speeding ticket in the mail from another state I've never been to, I'm not going to ignore it, I'm going to explain to the court why it's invalid. Ignoring legal notices, even from other jurisdictions than one's own, is generally unwise (with some exceptions). So is responding with insults instead of concrete le…
Re: Investigation into 4chan and its compliance with duties to protect its users
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can just treat 4chan as malware server or a drug cartel. There exist sanction mechanisms against foreign entities that do not use local law enforcement in which case opinion of US courts will be irrelevant.
But it's not, and so the treaties to which the US is party for those cases would not apply. What sanction methods are you thinking of that could get to US citizens on US soil without US governmental consent?
2. Using broader spectrum of law enforcement options if those citizens arrive in the UK