Discussion
US messageboard 4Chan mocks £520,000 fine for UK online safety breaches
rconti: > "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.So the UK plans to fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to British under-18s in France on holiday?
ceejayoz: This is more like the UK fining Parisian bars that courier alcohol to under-18s in the UK.
shaky-carrousel: Which is equally absurd.
OJFord: No it isn't? Real example is Amazon, a US company that sells alcohol in the UK, and is required to check age on order & delivery.
qup: Amazon is an international corporation with UK-incorporated entities.
OJFord: In theory the children are committing a crime yes, but obviously enforcement is extremely low; left mainly to their teachers.I don't think UK law governs foreign companies' overseas operations based on the nationality of the customer though, no.
dijit: They’re not breaking any law.Laws apply to actions in the country, they’re not based on citizenship.If you go to Amsterdam and sleep with a hooker, you didn’t break a law by doing that: despite prostitution (specifically purchasing sex) being illegal in basically every other western country.
gorgoiler: [delayed]
dec0dedab0de: Countries do have laws that apply even when you leave the country. For example, Americans living abroad still have to pay taxes.
internet2000: Let kids go to 4chan. I frequented it and turned out fine.
throwpoaster: The problem is you're getting downvoted by the people who didn't.
akramachamarei: Bold to assume downvoters vote on first-hand knowledge.
pearlsontheroad: afaik, prostitution is either legal or partially legal on the majority of Western countries.https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...
vasco: People used to tell kids to not go to a shady part of town while they spent their afternoons outside unsupervised. Can parents not tell kids to not go to certain websites? We still went to the shady part of town and the kids will still go to 4chan but at least we don't need to give away freedoms. Such erosion of freedom for the common person because parents can't have an awkward conversation is irritating.
2OEH8eoCRo0: Do you have children?
gleenn: Raising children is hard but assuming everyone has to sacrifice their rights so your job is easier means everyone means everyone loses long term.
patates: I used to hang out there too. However, describing me as 'fine' would require a lengthy debate over definitions.
mapotofu: I do. I also grew up on 4chan because I didn’t have an involved parent, and I lived in the suburbs where finding friends to just “go outside and play” wasn’t an option. Consuming that content was genuinely hurtful and probably forever altered my psyche. I have the means and knowledge, in technical skill and life experience, to know how these things work, and protect my kids from that. Most people don’t.
OJFord: That's true but not relevant to the spirit of the point.
ronsor: It is relevant. There's a material difference between shipping material overseas and shipping it (and handling it) within the destination country.If someone mails $ProhibitedItem at a USPS to the UK, then it's the job of local UK police and/or customs to reject the parcel if it is prohibited. It's the UK's problem, de facto if not de jure, because the sender is out of reach.If someone with a UK subsidiary and local processing center mails $ProhibitedItem to their center and delivers it to someone in the UK, then that's more than the UK's problem.
cjbgkagh: That’s not always true, and increasingly less so, particularly the Australians and the crime of child sex tourism. I am sure it’ll be expanded to hate crimes and disturbing the peace laws as well and from there used as a political cudgel to suppress opposition to government policies. At least for now you have to be a citizen of the country but the UK has stated an intention to extradite US citizens for online hate crimes.
tsukikage: More like the UK fining US porn publishers for not stopping British kids searching through the hedges in their street
guelo: There's always people that say it's the parents responsibility to monitor their kids. But as a parent, you either give your kids full access to the internet or nothing. The fault lies with the OS companies Google, Microsoft, Apple. They do a terrible job with parental controls. They make it very hard to setup, they're confusing and hard to use plus they barely work. I think they just do it as a checkbox for marketing or regulatory purposes. That's where I'd like to see regulation.
dijit: The response from Ofcom doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.If you are to sell a toy in the UK you must be a British company. (and must pay VAT and comply with British safety standards).If a consumer buys from overseas and imports a product then they do not have British consumer protections. Which is why so much aliexpress electrical stuff is dangerous (expecially USB chargers) yet it continues to be legally imported.Just, no british retailer would be allowed to carry it without getting a fine.
crtasm: Is it correct to say the consumer is importing a product when it's aliexpress shipping it to them?
reisse: Unless AliExpress has a local entity, like they do in some countries, yes.
rjsw: France can fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to under-18s itself.
rstat1: OS makers should not be in the business of enforcing censorship. If you want to shield your children from the "horrors" of the internet either use proper parental control software, or don't allow access at all like you said until your kids are mature to understand what's going onThe onus is on the parent to the be parent. Not the tech industry, and especially not the government.
gadders: If it wasn't for 4Chan, we might never have solved the Haruhi problemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpermutation#Lower_bounds,...I used to go on a curated version of 4Chan via Telegram. Yes there is a lot of racism (although it flies in every direction, between every ethnicity you could imagine) but there is also (due to the anonymous nature) some genuinely interesting discussions. I remember one thread about aircraft carriers being of no use being debated by US and UK submarine officers.There are also some genuinely funny bits. There was a guy in Greece who had found out that as long as he never graduated, he could live a basic life for free at university. His nickname was Dormogenes.
john_strinlai: there is a great clickhole headline that your comment reminds me of"Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point"4chan has produced some hilarious stuff, and they have also driven people to suicide. i suppose it is up to everyone individually to make the value judgement there.
helsinkiandrew: Particularly if AliExpress is paying local VAT and import taxes (or at least dealing with the import paperwork) or even less if it’s from one of their local (UK/EU etc) warehouses
3rodents: That’s not really true. The Ofcom representative said “not allowed” not “unable to”. Even if cocaine is legal in my country, I’m “not allowed” to sell it to British consumers by the power of the British authorities. The British authorities may not have legal authority in my jurisdiction but they can take action in their own, including issuing penalties and stopping my deliveries at the border.
oliwarner: But if a Brit comes to your country and buys cocaine from you, you wouldn't expect to be convicted as a dealer in the UK.Ofcom has a bad handle on web requests. Clients connect out. 4chan et al aren't pushing their services in anyone in the UK.
tokyobreakfast: The US CBP routinely intercepts "dangerous" products. I assume the Brits have the same.It's a wonder why AliExpress flies under the radar. I assume it's impossible to keep up with it all.The UK's comically over-engineered electrics are no match for some of these plug-in-and-die sketchy USB chargers from the Far East.DiodesGoneWild on YouTube does teardowns of many of these incredibly poorly constructed deathtraps.
refulgentis: Commenting on Europe has gotten really lax the last year or so. People kinda will just say whatever pops into their head and it’s some drive-by claim that they haven’t thought about for a second past it popping into their head, presumably because it’s become normalized. (i.e. “but everyone knows Europe goes too far”)Sometimes it self resolves - as you contributed here, yes, countries limit and interfere and fine other countries businesses, all the time!I don’t know what yours means though. What electrics are made in the UK? How are they over engineered?
tokyobreakfast: Are you having a mini-stroke?
refulgentis: What do you mean?I’m at +4, so, I’m doubting it’s unreadable…
strideashort: And by extension, the UK is free to implement His Majesty’s Greatest Firewall of the UK should they wish to control what is imported.
ChrisArchitect: Related:Ofcom has today fined 4chan £450k for not having age checks in placehttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47442838
jmkni: Getting flashbacks to the letters the Pirate Bay used to send lawyershttps://www.scribd.com/document/117922444/the-pirate-bay-res...I'm pretty sure in one they responded saying their lawyer was alseep in a ditch and would reply when he woke up lol
mrtksn: Europeans are following the wrong path on regulating the internet. Instead of calling it internet safety and annoy people, they should just make those services and the people running them liable for the damages.The same goes for the freedom of speech. Europeans should make it legal guarantee instead of trying to build walls around speech. So when X or 4Chan etc deletes a post that, it may lead to freedom of speech fines if deletion wasn't justified. Tha same for the algorithm, if a post that doesn't break the rules is discriminated by the algorithm, a hefty fine should apply.Suddenly we will have companies that keep their business clean and no claim for moral high ground.
OJFord: Commonwealth countries have extraterritorial jurisdiction. I don't know that it's ever been enforced for something so relatively petty as intoxication or prostitution, but it is nevertheless the law. (Obligatory IANAL though.)
mosura: This whole episode is a charade to do exactly that while claiming they are morally superior to China because the UK does it “for the children” while China does it because they are just evil authoritarians.For Tiananmen Square substitute Rape Gangs.
ge96: I remember I bought some pills online one time (neutroopics type) they came from like India and were intercepted by customs/I got a letter. It's funny my roommate at the time bought em and didn't get intercepted so was odd.In hindsight it is dumb to buy random pills and take em.
Am4TIfIsER0ppos: The answer is a computer the child must sit down and use in front of the family. Steve Jobs ruined the world with the invention of the iPhone, and whoever else is responsible for the more generic smartphone. Now parents use one to quieten their children and governments use it to surveil us all.
miohtama: But are you allowed to post pictures of your cocaine on a website that is not in the UK?
3rodents: You're even allowed to post photos of your cocaine on U.K. websites!
miohtama: It depends. If it causes anxiety to someone, it is illegal. Pictures of drugs could fall into this category.> Current law allows for restrictions on threatening or abusive words or behaviour intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace, sending another any article which is indecent or grossly offensive with an intent to cause distress or anxiety,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_Kingd...
nkrisc: > but you can't regulate a foreign business.Sure they can. It’s unlikely they can do anything about it though.
However, a lawyer representing the company - which has previously said it won't pay such fines - has responded to the demand with an AI-generated cartoon image of a hamster.
john_strinlai: >However, a lawyer representing the company - which has previously said it won't pay such fines - has responded to the demand with an AI-generated cartoon image of a hamster.>The latest image is not the first picture of a hamster lawyers for 4chan have sent in reply to Ofcomamazing. same energy as the pirate bay telling dreamworks to sodomize themselves. i cant help but laugh at the absurdness of it.
aydyn: Unlike TPB founders who were convicted in 2009 because copyright infringement also violates swedish law, the 4chan lawyers are correct that they are breaking no U.S. law. 1A provides broad protections.
