Share.

30 Comments

  1. Oh good, foreigners interfering in our politics. Definitely have our best interests at heart.

  2. ReporterNo7591 on

    Ofcom might be one of the worst institutions I’ve ever known, pathetic puritan pricks.

  3. > The lawyer added: “One big defection from European censorship regimes, and it’s over. They’ll never censor any American again.”

    Interesting to see on what basis.

    > Sorry, the First Amendment gives Americans the right to run our servers however we damn well please.

    No one is telling them how to run their servers. It’s just that if they want to make money in other countries, they have to obey those countries’ laws, like it or not. Of course, in his opinion USA dictates what the rest of the world can do, fair enough but not exactly realistic.

  4. Whether I agree or not, I’m wondering how far they think they’re going to get in a UK court about this? Surely they’re just going to be told if they don’t want to obey UK laws, don’t offer their product in the UK? 

  5. They’re making a claim on federal court? This doesn’t make basic sense. The US courts have no jurisdiction over a UK body.

  6. MiddleAgeCool on

    I’m not sure how he’s planning on fighting this to be honest.

    His argument will be that Americans should be able to run their companies as they want that OFCOM will counter with “we agree, but if you want your services to be available in the UK then you need to adhere to our laws. If you don’t want to do that, we’ll stop your services being offered”.

  7. Hellstorm901 on

    Could be an interesting fight, if Starmer fights against these companies, which he will, and orders punishments on them as he usually responds to dissident then he’ll get a call from Trumps government reminding him what will happen if he tries to screw with American trade

    If, or should I say when, Starmer then backs down and allows American companies to operate in the UK without complying with the OSA other companies can exploit this loophole and we can call out the blatant hypocrisy of Starmer creating a Two Kier system

  8. Not that they have much of a leg to stand on, the UK parliament is, for better or worse, sovereign in the UK.

  9. hamstar_potato on

    People are surprised, but even with all the bad stuff going on in America, nothing was censored. You’re still allowed to see protests footage, South Park episode on Trump, ICE agents on their arrests, can still post “woke” stuff all over, can criticize the abortion ban, can post wrong stuff and be corrected, can debate, have nuance, etc. So, I can see why America, mostly big corpos, aren’t fine with stuff like this. It makes the internet unusable, all blame is put on them and actually, the last shred of privacy is broken. People online expose and harass lots of pedos and criminals in general because they’re easy to track without any ID. Look at the Luca Magnotta and Kero the wolf cases, people were doing detective jobs for free. EDP445 isn’t left by people to exist online to gain audience and money. People found the flag in a room in Spain even. If only the police worked as hard and took complaints seriously.

    In my country, a guy mostly exposing online scams but not only and a victim female singer were talking a few years ago about a forum made for revenge porn, posting spy pics of their female family members, deepfakes of female celebrities and their teen daughters, all sorts of illegal porn. Yet nothing was done, even though they could be easily found (especially those who posted family members or random women on the street). It’s not like they were good at hiding their identities. It took women being mad over a rise in femicides this year to have the forum brought back into the conversation and have the creator investigated. And even in the kidnapping of 2 teen girls some 5-6 years ago, the people at the emergency call center were awful to the one who managed to call them and unprofessional, police was incompetent as well. A life which could’ve been saved was lost. No one cares about children and women, if they did, they’d actually work on real world cases. I honestly was surprised an ordinary woman won a case in court over revenge porn blackmail recently, it was like winning the lottery. Some pedo raping 13 y/o girl got a slap on the wrist in the past, and that judge was female and managed to fail upward into a better position.

  10. HerefordLives on

    Legally I don’t think this’ll get anywhere. But it could cause a political row

  11. discipleofdoom on

    Regardless of how successful this will be, how much taxpayer money will be spent defending this in court? All to prevent kids from listening to Spotify or accessing addiction resources online.

  12. “They’ll never censor any American again.”

    Yep, and this is why so many American flags get burnt.

    Having lived both before & during the Internet, I really am looking forward to living After it.

    If people are dumb enough not see what this corrupt shyster is trying to pull, they deserve everything that happens to them.

  13. It’s a mumsy act, powered by bereaved parents, and that’s always dangerous. I don’t blame ofCom, they are acting under orders.

  14. GiftedGeordie on

    I never thought I’d find myself supporting the nation that elected Donald Trump twice and has a nasty habit of dragging us into almost every war they’ve gotten themselves involved in, but here we are.

    That said, it does ring a bit hollow when the Americans have already introduced their own Online Safety Bill and, judging by how the Trump regime talks about people that it doesn’t like, it’ll make the UK one look positively liberal by comparison.

  15. elementfortyseven on

    I mean, thats the least they can do. Its US precedent that allows activist the leverage over payment processors

  16. Have to laugh at that stupid tory leader shit talking the OSA and acting like it wasn’t her party who brought it in 😂

  17. Afraid_Jelly2891 on

    Whilst I have significant concerns over the online safety bill, mainly that it is an excuse to farm data and identify those undertaking legal activities online, hell will freeze over before I align myself with the American “free speech” cowboys. They are all for freedom when regulation hurts their bottom line but not so much for it when it hurts their interests or they find it intrusive to their business or personal dealings. I also think they fundementally misunderstand the concept of UK based legislation. Firstly, it’s not European. Secondly, they can run their servers how they “damn well please” and chose not to do business in the UK. If you don’t want to be subject to UK legislation then just don’t allow access from the UK. It’s really that simple. Also, just to add, when the shoe is on the other foot and the UK or any other country has legislative concerns surrounding the behaviours of the US government or industries they take a hard line combative approach of telling us to put up and shut up.

  18. WelshBluebird1 on

    Under what pretense exactly? Your website being available in the UK means it has to obey UK laws. That’s nothing new. GDPR is applicable for EU citizens regardless of where the website is hosted, and websites available in Germany have always had to cater for their strict laws around nazi imagry, and this is no different.

    You can disagree with the law or agree with the law but think the implementation is stupid, and still think Americans thinking its all about them is utterly bonkers.

  19. ParkHoliday5569 on

    I will cancel any service that demands proof of age, isnt that right polly

  20. This act of parliament really does need the likes of the big tech companies, and their money mountains, to take it for a judicial review because of the imprecise implementation and the fallout from that.

    If Labour were more politically savvy, which they’ve been proven to be abysmal at thus far, they’d kick the can down the road if they don’t have the balls to implement it properly and fairly.

    At the moment, even though it was a Tory bill, Labour are going to take the political hit and it’s particularly ironic considering they’re letting 16 & 17 year olds vote at the next election. Kids won’t like them fucking with their internet.

  21. If one thing can unite nations across all our differences, it’s access to pornography

  22. spank_monkey_83 on

    Counter-sue the American companies for being irresponsible and allowing children on x rated sites

  23. Kemi Badenoch against a policy that her own bloody party started. For crying out loud!

  24. Kemi slams it but stops short at saying she would repeal it? Why open your mouth then you irrelevant tool.

  25. Technical_Ad_440 on

    good luck we really need this cause with all parties in UK basically for is we a screwed every which way. problem is with the global roll outs of goolge and microsoft age verification stuff it feels like on a certain level its all planned and all going out no matter what happens

  26. While I don’t agree with the recent law, and would love to see backlash resulting in change i feel like “American lawyer makes a tweet” is a pointless article.