cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/35889767
Comments
Text
BYRNE & STORM, P.C.ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW
Re: Statement Regarding Ofcom's Reported Provisional Notice - 4chan Community Support LLC
Byrne & Storm, P.C. ( @ByrneStorm ) and Coleman Law, P.C. ( @RonColeman ) represent 4chan Community Support LLC ("4chan").
According to press reports, the U.K. Office of Communications ("Ofcom") has issued a provisional notice under the Online Safety Act alleging a contravention by 4chan and indicating an intention to impose a penalty of £20,000, plus daily penalties thereafter.
4chan is a United States company, incorporated in Delaware, with no establishment, assets, or operations in the United Kingdom. Any attempt to impose or enforce a penalty against 4chan will be resisted in U.S. federal court.
American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an e-mail. Under settled principles of U.S. law, American courts will not enforce foreign penal fines or censorship codes.
If necessary, we will seek appropriate relief in U.S. federal court to confirm these principles.
United States federal authorities have been briefed on this matter.
The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, was reportedly warned by the White House to cease targeting Americans with U.K. censorship codes (according to reporting in the Telegraph on July 30th).
Despite these warnings, Ofcom continues its illegal campaign of harassment against American technology firms. A political solution to this matter is urgently required and that solution must come from the highest levels of American government.
We call on the Trump Administration to invoke all diplomatic and legal levers available to the United States to protect American companies from extraterritorial censorship mandates.
Our client reserves all rights.
In strict legal definitions that's slightly different due to it handling defined personal data, how its processed and where its located rather than merely "Significant number of UK users accessing the site". GDPR is also very well written and quite clear unlike the OSA which is vague, with a enforcer that's already pretty infamous in the UK for being somewhat loopy in how they operate. Under US law and frankly international business law ofcom has pretty much zero mandate to demand what they are demanding of a entirely US domiciled company. Most matters of GDPR in regards to a foreign company will apply to companies with infra and a presence in the EU anyways.
What the UK says here pretty much doesn't matter in any way shape or form, and if they're going to ban it then ban it already rather than chasing around with fines and paperwork. I'd still rather this wasn't happening as the OSA is a massive steaming turd of a law that'll merely be used to suppress speech.
But yes technically if Hiroyuki Nishimura stepped foot in the UK he might wind up with some flak from it but beyond that this is just posturing.
They say comply or get blocked, we know what is the next step
Aye probs a DNS level block. Either way potato potatø the OSA is a disturbing authoritarian mess of a law, some absolute idiots in government are now advocating to begin gunning for VPNs as well : (.
While I agree with you on the stupidity of the law, Americans company should not get away with not respecting local laws in country they do operate, like in the EU. An example is the fair usage law that is completely ignored by American company.
Mostly agree on the principle but I'll admit I am so rabidly against this heap of a law I'll support virtually any site or entity that goes against it. Mark my words this shite will be used to begin targeting sexual minorities given the UKs track record of being TERF island.
While I understand the struggle, I would be careful not to taint the movement by aligning with money grabbers that don't really care about the fight, just their bottom line. Especially when it's 4Chan running to the feds 🤣