Amateurs. Russia has fined Google more than the GDP of the entire planet. Odds of collecting are about the same.

Odds of collecting some 4chan execs travelling abroad are a lot higher, though

4chan's lawyer, who has been engaging with this well since the beginning, has clearly advised his clients, who have no intent of ever going to the UK, to not go there. In addition, Ofcom does not have the ability to collect them through the EU itself. They must go to the UK.

It already sounds like Ofcom is likely to lose lawsuits about this, as they do not have jurisdiction in the U.S., where 4chan is hosted.

> Ofcom is likely to lose lawsuits about this, as they do not have jurisdiction in the U.S.

How would Ofcom even have a lawsuit to lose? Are they going to file it in the US? Of course not, USA courts will tell them to pound sand.

They'll just advise the UK government to block 4chan nationwide. Which is really what they want to do anyway.

4chan's lawyer's response:

"In the only country in which 4chan operates, the United States, it is breaking no law and indeed its conduct is expressly protected by the First Amendment."[0]

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c624330lg1ko

The lawyer is great on Twitter, he's not only defending 4chan, he's on a crusade to prevent this stuff in the future and trying to get bills passed in the US.

https://x.com/prestonjbyrne

As shown in that same article, they also responded:

>>>

"Companies – wherever they're based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the UK. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different," she said.

"The UK is setting new standards for online safety. Age checks and risk assessments are cornerstones of our laws, and we'll take robust enforcement action against firms that fall short."

<<<

Quite frankly she seems completely out of touch with her own argument. The UK can certainly legislate away tobacco sales, for instance; they can't go after tobacco producers in a foreign state. 4Chan operates in the US and is a US company. They have no jurisdiction over it, even if their citizenry can access it; it's on them to block that access if they don't like it. Unless they're also implying that the US government should be allowed to go after UK companies that don't follow it's free speech regulations because American citizens can access them.

Speaking as a UK citizen: you're exactly right. If the UK wants to prevent 4chan from being imported into the UK then it needs to block it at the border as it would for physical goods.

The fact that's technically hard to do (at least without going full-on CCP) doesn't change the situation. Attempting to fine a foreign entity for doing something that breaks no laws in the foreign entity's jurisdiction is just risible.

And we shall call it "the Great Firewall of the UK".

It is amazing that these guys don't see the irony of monkeying totaliterian states policies, in term of surveillance and censorship.

So, the Great FUK for short?

I hope they do block it.

UK ISPs do block some domains though.

Which does nothing to block 4chan, because everyone knows what a VPN is and how to get one.

The same UK politicians are now pushing to block VPNs. Hence the great firewall talk which they are trying to skirt by fining US companies.

It's very much a rock-and-a-hard-place situation. "It's an import", so they have to respond to it like they'd respond to imports...

But unlike physical imports, there's a sense that blocking these imports is an affront to base philosophical freedom in a way that prohibiting physical imports isn't.

Their goal is to create a presedent so they can start applying it to platforms they don't like. Its happening all over Europe not just the UK and the plan is clear. They want to repress discourse that is not officially sanctioned.

They can try to set whatever precedent they like. But US courts won't accept the argument, so it'll just stay a fee that accumulates on some paper ledger.

The real goal it to start banning US sites like fb,aws etc so that Europe starts building their own

> 4Chan operates in the US

And the UK... each time it delivers there.

4Chan has blocked the entire UK IP range. They do not host any infrastructure there.

They are bound by UK law exactly as much as they are bound by Venutian or Mars law.

The UK can block whatever they want if they'd like to become an authoritarian firewall state.

But they have no legal basis to fine 4chan.

I disagree. It's no different from selling to a foreign buyer by sending the product in the mail. You're not doing business in their country, and it's the buyer's responsibility to adhere to their local laws about imports, not yours.

It's unfortunate that the US lawyers did not cite the reply given in Arkell v Pressdram.

Arkell v Pressdram was in response to a civil claim that never reached a court, so slightly different. I take the wider point though.

And now we'll watch the UK take the logical next step which is for the government to mandate that all ISPs in the country block 4chan.

CCP "Great Firewall" style.

You'd be amazed at the times I've argued with people on HN that free speech infringement by the UK government has grown rampant, only for them to enact the next draconian law a month later.

We've had Hadrian's firewall blocking certain piracy sites for years.

Already have the makings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_th...

Most Brits already have a VPN to beat off so the effect will be negligible.

"Most" is probably not accurate. I can't imagine the average middle aged individual in the UK has a VPN they use regularly. I'd be pleasantly surprised if that was the case.

The average middle aged individual probably doesn't read 4chan.

VPN take up in the UK is around 20-25%

Not everyone is as pornsick as you seem to think. Your own circle of mastrubators, perhaps. But not most British people.

And then they'll make VPNs illegal

The directors and officers better not transit through Heathrow without giving the current whitehouse admin a hefty donation first.

Mother Britain will be happy to make an example out of them if Uncle Sam doesn't intervene.

UK fining an American company for this is absurd. 4Chan isn't breaking any laws. You can make it illegal for your own citizens but you can't regulate a foreign business. UK citizens should fight for the right to free speech though.

While I agree it seems absurd, this is how the UK's unwritten constitution works - the UK Parliament is not restricted to legislating just for the territory of the UK. Of course it can only realistically enforce within UK borders, but it can pass whatever legislation it wishes.

There is a famous quote regarding this nature of British parliamentary sovereignty that is taught to every law student in the UK: "If Parliament enacts that smoking in the streets of Paris is an offence, then it is an offence" - Ivor Jennings.

This is false. You of course can regulate and fine a foreign business. That's how trade regulations work.

The UK isn't going to get a cent from that but the leadership is banned from entering the UK for the foreseeable future.

Doing this a lot as a country is how you achieve pariah status and losing a bunch of trade, though.

> the leadership is banned from entering the UK for the foreseeable future

Not at all. But if they do enter, they might find difficulty leaving.

Trade regulations apply to the importer, which might also be the exporter if they have a local presence, but also may not be.

If I buy something illegal off of AliExpress, the US government won't and can't do squat to the seller. If they decide to enforce the law, they'll go after me.

How is this different than, for example, the US fining TikTok? https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-ftc-record-fine-childrens...

How about the EU imposing GDPR restrictions on non-eu companies?

Depends on whether those businesses want to do business with the EU

The GDPR is about your data being handled overseas.

OFCOM&co is about overseas data going to you.

I think that's different because I have a positive personal opinion of the GDPR and a negative personal opinion about what the UK is doing. Therefore the GDPR is good and this is bad. It's really quite objective.

4chan doesn't need age checks, everyone knows there are only five year olds on it. :-p

Those were FBI agents. Expect a knock on your door any time now.

4chan fighting for us all! Bravo.

This part somewhat surprising to me:

> Data shows that nearly 80% of the top 100 pornography sites in the UK now have age checks in place. This means that on average, every day, over 7 million visitors from the UK are accessing pornography services that have deployed age assurance.

I would have expected that most people would switch to other pornography sites that don't have age checks rather than doing an age check. But apparently that isn't the case. (Or their data is misleading. People in the UK who are using VPNs presumably can't be easily identified as British.)

Yeah, that is ABSOLUTELY a lie.

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to include links as a new user but Pornbiz posted an article showing AV lost them 90% of traffic. There's a BBC article where researchers found AV compliant sites were decimated on their top traffic ranking on Similarweb. And I working in the industry saw our traffic drop by 99.9% during our AV test.

Users don't use VPN, they certainly don't upload ID... they just go to noncompliant sites. Don't believe UK government's gaslighting.

£450k? - Quick, we must show we've done something.

> or requiring Internet Service Providers to block a site in the UK.

Ah, that's what they want.

They probably don't even expect 4chan to pay up - they just want them gone.

It is, it didn’t, and you didn’t.