4chan fined $26K for refusing to assess risks under UK Online Safety Act
a year ago by schizoidman to c/technology
If 4chan continues to ignore Ofcom, the forum could be blocked in the UK. And 4chan could face even bigger fines totaling about $23 million or 10 percent of 4chan’s worldwide turnover, whichever is higher. 4chan also faces potential arrest and/or "imprisonment for a term of up to two years," the lawsuit said.
People should fight for their rights and free speech and make pressure on the gouvernement. Blocking is isolationism.
It's a process. They need to issue the fine first to give them a chance to pay rather than jumping to blocking it. If they continue to refuse to pay that's where it'll go.
You have to obey the law of whatever country you are currently occupying, even if the rule is bad shit crazy, actually especially if the rule is bat shit crazy. There are plenty of people who have done nothing wrong who would be arrested if they step foot in China, but that doesn't really bother anyone because they don't step foot in China.
Also it would be interesting to see what they would even be charged with, since offcom don't really have authority to issue arrest warrants. Ofcom barely have the authority to enforce UK law in the UK. Otherwise the likes of GB news wouldn't exist.
It's an interesting idea that countries could only fine websites that operate in said country. Could get away with a lot by finding a permissive country to do what would otherwise be illegal and worth of fines.
"Selling user's private information illegally? Buddy, Tuvalo don't care"
Nope lol, countries definitely try to fine websites not operated in the same country. Sometimes they're just not succesful
The uk is irrelevant anyways. They will not be missed when they strengthen the Great Firewall rules
Then get your asses in order. If you have doubts, the French across ye pond taught pretty well how to use guillotines to achieve it. Didn't you guys also have a mask guy do the same?
Then 4chan shouldn't do business in the UK by selling 4chan passes there.
4chan should just block UK IPs. They already ban VPN IPs from posting, so obviously they have some infrastructure there to support that.
Not you again... genuinely convinced this user is a bot. He made this same argument a month ago on a now deleted post almost verbatim. I disputed his claims with evidence and they continuously moved the goalpost through the entire argument. either braindead or just software please ignore.
Then explain why you disagree instead of coming at them with ad-hominem.
Not who you replied to, but: there is no legal, ethical, or moral, requirement for a business of one country to comply with the laws of another. If there was, all business would be beholden to the most overbearing government on any one subject. And just to specifically state it before it’s brought up, being tied into the international banking system doesn’t change that; if a state doesn’t want its citizenry doing business with a particular entity, it’s on them to stop it on their side or come to an agreement with the other’s government. Which does happen, especially with the conglomerate hegemony of components of the international banking system, but naturally that means that the only time any entity of a state is forced to comply with the laws of another is when their home-state demands it, which ultimately isn’t the laws of the other.
Why should that be their problem?
Imagine for a moment that 4chan is a business that sells alcoholic beverages in the US. Now imagine the UK has instituted prohibition and banned the consumption of alcohol.
now, some enterprising individuals have taken it upon themselves to buy, smuggle, and then sell those beverages inside the UK.
Clearly, the government has intended to ban the consumption of alcohol, not the sale of it.
Now the UK government is trying to shackle hefty fines against an American company for having the "audacity" of selling a product to an individual within the confines of the US.
again, the UK banned the consumption of alcohol, not the sale of. 4Chan isn't forcing UK citizens to drink the alcohol. They are simply selling the product, within their country of origin, to individuals who want to purchase it.
now, do you still think the UK government has a right to fine 4chan or do you think maybe the UK government should elaborate on their prohibition regulations to ensure their citizens are properly "protected"?
now, some enterprising individuals have taken it upon themselves to buy, smuggle, and then sell those beverages inside the UK
Wouldn't it be more akin to those individuals putting the alcohol into 4chan's trucks that are taking other stuff to the UK? (and worse with 4chan's knowledge)
In that case do you think it's unreasonable that the uk government imposes penalties for 4chan refusing to remove the alcohol that they know is there from the trucks.
And then if 4chan then refuses to pay said penalties start to not allow them to bring any trucks into the uk at all?
the "trucks" in your example are the users computers/phones.
the highways are the Internet, which is owned and maintained by the UK government after their "gate".
the alcohol is the content.
4chans trucks deliver to the UKs "gate" and the UK user does the rest from there on the UK highways.
if the UK doesn't want the alcohol in their country, they need to stop their citizens from purchasing it and block it from entering their country at their "gate".
this is what any reasonable country would do. they (UK) already do it for actual physical products like potassium bromate, azodicarbonamide, and certain artificial food dyes like Yellow 5 and Yellow 6.
Are they going to sue or fine the companies that manufacture those products? no. They're going to ban the products that use them and then go after the individuals that smuggle them in.
Okkkkkay so I'll play your hypothetical game.
So in your scenario here, some enterprising individuals start off by smuggling alcohol into the UK. By definition according to Merriam-Webster, smuggling is: "to import or export secretly contrary to the law and especially without paying duties imposed by law".
According to UK laws, this has the following consequences:
Penalties for Drug Smuggling
The legal consequences of drug smuggling in the United Kingdom are robust and intricate. These penalties are designed to deter and punish those involved in the illicit trade of controlled substances, and they vary significantly depending on the nature and scale of the offense.Prison Sentences
Convictions for drug smuggling can result in substantial prison sentences. The duration of imprisonment varies based on factors such as the type and quantity of drugs involved, the defendant’s role in the operation, and any previous criminal history. For Class A drugs like heroin or cocaine, sentences can range from several years to life imprisonment. The courts take a particularly stern stance on those involved in large-scale drug trafficking operations, often imposing the harshest sentences.Fines
In addition to imprisonment, courts may impose hefty fines on individuals convicted of drug smuggling. These financial penalties are meant to act as both a punishment and a deterrent. Fines can be substantial and are typically proportional to the severity of the offense and the defendant’s financial means.Confiscation Orders
The UK’s legal system has mechanisms to prevent criminals from profiting from their drug smuggling activities. Courts can issue confiscation orders requiring the defendant to surrender any assets or wealth acquired through drug smuggling. This means that criminals face prison time and fines and risk losing ill-gotten gains.Forfeiture of Assets
In cases where assets such as vehicles, boats, properties, or other possessions were used to commission drug smuggling offenses, law enforcement agencies can seize these assets through forfeiture proceedings. This serves as a punishment for the offender and a means to disrupt criminal enterprises.Travel Restrictions
Convictions related to drug smuggling can result in travel restrictions imposed on the individual. These restrictions may include bans on leaving the country to prevent the convicted person from continuing their criminal activities abroad. Such measures are implemented to ensure that those involved in drug smuggling cannot easily evade justice by fleeing the country.
Lets move to the selling of the illegally imported alcohol:
You can be stopped, fined or arrested by police if you’re under 18 and drinking alcohol in public.
If you’re under 18, it’s against the law:
- for someone to sell you alcohol
- to buy or try to buy alcohol
- for an adult to buy or try to buy alcohol for you
- to drink alcohol in licensed premises (such as a pub or restaurant)
However, if you’re 16 or 17 and accompanied by an adult, you can drink (but not buy) beer, wine or cider with a meal.
If you’re 16 or under, you may be able to go to a pub (or premises primarily used to sell alcohol) if you’re accompanied by an adult. However, this isn’t always the case. It can also depend on the specific conditions for that premises.
It’s illegal to give alcohol to children under 5.
For the sake of your argument, we'll remove the law that says its illegal to sell alcohol to children, I guess? Regardless, it might be some enterprising individuals that are selling it, but they are selling the alcohol in the UK. In UK currency, To UK residents. In the UK. We are getting into possibly exchanging UK currency for US currency, which is a whole new can of worms, but we can save that for later.
Now to your question:
now, do you still think the UK government has a right to fine 4chan or do you think maybe the UK government should elaborate on their prohibition regulations to ensure their citizens are properly “protected”?
Easy answer is yes. They should be fined for smuggling alcohol into the UK, which is what the current law calls for.
Now hypothetical for you.
Imagine for a moment that the UK has banned looking at alcohol if you are under 18. Doesn't matter if you look at alcohol if you are over the age of 18, but you just can't legally look at alcohol if you are under 18.
Now someone comes along named 4chan and builds a giant building in the UK that has a ton of alcohol inside of it. There isn't anything outside of the building. Its only inside where the alcohol is. They don't have protections in place that prevent anyone under 18 from going inside the building. Anyone can come in and look. You can be 5 years old, or 100 years old. As a matter of fact, tons of people from all over the UK come and visit this building daily, even children.
Now the UK government comes along and says, "Hey 4chan, you need to verify that anyone that goes into your building is at least 18 years old, because if someone under 18 looks at the alcohol in there, thats against the law."
4chan ignores the UK and continues letting anyone inside, not verifying anyone's age. Not only that, but they're actually selling alcohol to children in there, and letting children make their own alcohol as well.
Should the UK be allowed to fine/arrest 4chan until they meet the demands?
gonna be honest, I didn't read anything past this part.
So in your scenario here, 4chan starts off by smuggling alcohol into the UK.
I didn't read any of it because you clearly didn't read what I said.
here's the part you conveniently forgot and it literally changes the entire argument.
some enterprising individuals have taken it upon themselves to buy, smuggle, and then sell those beverages inside the UK.
next time you want to argue your point don't employ the use of bad faith tactics and try to argue your point without manufacturing flaws.
Learn to read.
Imagine running a website for 20 years, changing absolutely nothing, and one day you're being targeted because someone else on the other side of the planet changed something at their end.
Tell them to piss off.
They'll come after your phpbb instance next.
“Block us then. We’re not paying your fines and you’ll never arrest us as we’ll never step foot in your country. Get fucked.” That’s about the response I’d have I think… attached with a photo of tubgirl or something for the classic lawls.
Ok I wish I did not search for tubgirl now
This is a case of stupid laws that still don't understand the internet (35+ years in to wide use, mofos)
If an http GET request initiated from country A traverses routers and wires around the globe to grab some data from a server in country B, then we have to accept that the owners of the server are not "operating in country A" and in fact the user in country A is responsible for import.
If some laws in country A have a problem with this, then they should unplug their internet wires at the border, or at least learn how to use them and/or govern their citizens.
All that is tongue in cheek to say they can fuck right off.
Yeah it's a stupid law and they were told it wouldn't work by industry experts. But the politicians that were in power when all this was first been decided were Conservatives and therefore arrogant and of the opinion that if they don't like something, it's realities responsibility to reconfigure itself.
Then Labour got in and for some reason implemented the stupid law anyway despite having heard none of the consultations, and of course now it turns out that the consultations told them not to do it. Now I'm sure the industry experts would have been ignored anyway but Labour look really daft now.
They have basically accepted that this law is unworkable and is basically going to be ignored by everyone, but they still have to go through all of the pantomime of trying to enforce it. I'm sure eventually they'll quietly kill it because the whole thing has been such an embarrassment for them.
I think it's well established by now that this bunch of Labour politicians too are "arrogant and of the opinion that if they don’t like something, it’s realities responsibility to reconfigure itself".
That would amongst other things neatly explain why they went around and implemented the stupid law.
It also doesn't help that they're being advised by people who don't understand the world anymore and who's last real contribution was probably in the 1970s. The fact that they can't even capitalise on the fact that Boris Johnson has been found guilty of misappropriation of government funds is just ridiculous and shows how incompetent they are as politicians.
were Conservatives and therefore arrogant and of the opinion that if they don’t like something, it’s realities responsibility to reconfigure itself.
Which is exactly what they have done with tariffs in the US.
Th US has taken it to step further. Somehow they've managed to convince a significant junk of the population that a tariff is not a tax, and that the tariff is paid by the importing country, even though that's not how tariffs work. They don't require reality to actually do anything, they just require the populace to be mind numbingly stupid. Fortunately, they are.
It's pretty ironic, the United States was founded on the back of unfair taxation, and yet financial literacy is probably lower in the US than it is in any other country in the world.
I remind people as much as possible that it is essentially a federal sales tax.
If some laws in country A have a problem with this, then they should unplug their internet wires at the border, or at least learn how to use them and/or govern their citizens.
What used to be called The Great Firewall of China. It used to be unthinkable for western countries.
You can't blame this on old people. This is only happening now that the Boomers are on the way out. People who sent international letters or made international phone calls were aware that they were communicating with a different country with different laws. I think we are seeing this now, because now we have people who experience the internet as something happening on their own phone, at their location.
They're retiring or dying of old age soon, they think now's the time to shit all over the floor and trash the place.
They’re retiring
Retirement is when it's about time to get into big politics. Most politicians on higher levels are 60+ y.o.
UK cabinet is mainly GenXers. I didn't count exactly, but Boomers still seem to outnumber Millennials. Definitely on the way out, though.
I wouldn't mind the politicians from 30 years ago, who stayed away from this bullshit.
The UK didn't ban leaded petrol until 1999 meaning most millenials will suffer from the boomer-loony disease as they were poisoned during their childhood.
Let's also not forget that fuel for light aircraft still contains lead :/
But thirty years ago I was half my height
Funnily enough the CIA (yes, the CIA) was largely involved in keeping the internet a free and open space for all, heck they even contributed encryption algorithms to keep data private and such ...
The reason why the free internet existed for so long was because it was a big ideological project for the US. (the internet is the space of all ideas and as such represents the platonic/christian concept of heaven). It's only now ending because it's served its purpose. The people have exchanged ideas worldwide, and that only needs to happen twice, similarly to how you can only infect yourself with the same virus once (because the second infection does way less impact), you can only infect yourself with the same idea once. So, once the worldwide ideas are exchanged, the internet serves very little purpose anymore.
Also why the fuck would you piss off 4chan with their years of stalking, ddosing, swatting, etc of successful campaigns against anything they felt wrongged or even just annoyed them.
They were defanged many years ago by the new owners and raiding is banned.
Great analogy.
If 4chan make revenue by advertising UK goods and services to UK users, then they are very much operating in the UK. It's not reasonable to make the argument that you should be able to do business with a country and opt out of its laws simply by running the physical servers abroad. We don't tolerate it for wire fraud or CSAM, but nobody's rushing out to defend the sovereign rights of child abusers and scammers.
I don't agree with the Online Safety Act on its own terms, but this is a dud of an argument.
With wire fraud and csam, the activity is illegal in the host country as well as the target country, which is not the case here.
If 4chan make revenue by advertising UK goods and services to UK users, then they are very much operating in the UK.
By your logic, any website with advertising is operating in EVERY country worldwide.
By your logic, any website with advertising is operating in EVERY country worldwide.
No. Every ad platform out there has the advertiser choose what region to advertise in. Nobody wants to pay to advertise in countries where they don’t sell their products. Likewise websites have the option not to serve countries they don’t want to comply with the laws of, and indeed many do this exact thing.
The whole argument being presented is being intentionally naive about both the technology and the law. Y’all are arguing based on how you WANT the world to be rather than how it is.
And as a website you don't deal with any of that, you just implement an ad platform's ad window and they serve whatever regional ads are relevant to your visitors. So yes, practically all websites with advertising would be operating in every country worldwide, by your logic.
British government fines an American company, based in America, for serving data from American servers that was compliant with American law.
This whole law is complete overreach. It's like banning a book and then getting mad at the author when one of your citizens buys one on holiday and brings it back with them
I think Iran should fine the UK just as much for allowing the Satanic verses to be sold since that novel are banned in Iran.
Any argument they give is the same argument why the 4chan shit is laughable.
You probably don't want Iran to have jurisdiction over your dot-com.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Iran.[2] The list of crimes punishable by death includes murder; rape; child molestation; homosexuality; drug trafficking; armed robbery; kidnapping; terrorism; burglary; incest; fornication; adultery; sodomy; sexual misconduct; prostitution;[3][4] plotting to overthrow the Islamic government; political dissidence; sabotage; arson; rebellion; apostasy; blasphemy; extortion; counterfeiting; smuggling; recidivist consumption of alcohol; producing or preparing food, drink, cosmetics, or sanitary items that lead to death when consumed or used; producing and publishing pornography; using pornographic materials to solicit sex; capital perjury; recidivist theft; certain military offences (e. g., cowardice, assisting the enemy); "waging war against God"; "spreading corruption on Earth"; espionage; and treason.[5][6] Iran carried out at least 977 executions in 2015, at least 567 executions in 2016,[7] and at least 507 executions in 2017.[8] In 2018 there were at least 249 executions, at least 273 in 2019, at least 246 in 2020, at least 290 in 2021, at least 553 in 2022, at least 834 in 2023,[9] and at least 901 executions in 2024.[10] In 2023, Iran was responsible for 74% of all recorded executions in the world, with the UN confirming that at least 40 people were executed in one week in 2024.
Frankly, 4chan users or operators would probably have violated some of those, were they under jurisdiction of Iranian law.
I think that's what @ArmchairAce1944 was getting at
Salman Rushdie: First time?
Pretty sure 4chan is Japanese owned now so I'm confused. I guess they still operate out of the USA. Idk. Currently owned by Hiroyuki Nishimura, who also owns 2channel. He acquired 4chan from Christopher Poole 2015. Good Smile Company is a major investor but he's still in charge.
Its probably a parent company situation.
Lots of corpo structures are just large parent companies that actually just own a bunch of smaller companies so that the parent company gets the profits while the smaller companies make the risky products and can be bankrupted at any minute.
The company I work for does that. We just bought a couple companies that were competitors in a risky but profitable market. The full idea is that if one company gets sued to oblivion, we let that company die, move all the employees and customers to the backup company, and call it a day.
Capitalism baby!
The UK hasn't been part of the EU for a long ass time. Have you been living under a rock?
Ignoring that the UK isn't part of the EU, the EUs privacy laws extend to all European citizens, and it has treaties with most of the world (including the US) allowing it to enforce those.
If you're ok with this then imagine your local lemmy instance getting fined by China/Qatar/Thailand/etc for posting something breaking their laws.
Fine the phone company for allowing calls they don't like.
Fuck yes, fine the phone companies who allow these spoofed phone number scammers to reach me. (/s... Mostly)
Actually they should close that loophole.
More likely than dining then for calls I don’t want to get they they facilitate by selling my data. Linda of like the scale car warrantee mail you get because the DMV sold your data.
Flipside is EU trying to enforce GDPR and such
GDPR can only be enforced if the business wants to continue to do business in Europe. There are lots of non-European businesses that do not enforce GDPR rules but they can't sell products or services in Europe.
But of course 4chan doesn't sell any products or services anywhere, it's not a business, so it's a bit hard to see exactly how this could be enforced.
It's selling 4chan passes, yeah it's a thing unfortunately
Gross Domestic... Projekt Red?
T'was a poorly-marked joke.
If they operate in China then it seems legit. If they don't operate in China it's a non issue.
This might be stupid, but the corollary of your statement is that a sovereign nation can't impose laws on foreign business....
That what you want?
Unironically yes. Otherwise the internet as we know it is very much over, and what we have instead is a mesh of country-nets.
I mean, what is actually "doing business" when it comes a simple web page or a forum for example? Merely existing and being reachable.
Yeah, and a county could say "you can't do business in our county anymore" and block them
A country can ban dildos, but they don't get to tell a foreign factory they can't make dildos. If an importer orders dildos anyways, that's between the importer and customs. Which in this case the importer is the ISP
Otherwise the internet as we know it is very much over, and what we have instead is a mesh of country-nets.
which, TBH, doesn't seem so bad to me. as an european, i'm personally sick of all the sick (as in, unwell) culture from america swapping over via the internet and poisoning people's minds.
i mean, all the culture war is literally instigated by american capitalists to disrupt society and to disrupt the people's coherence, to make them weaker and therefore easier to exploit.
If it wasn't for continuous exposure to american influence, europe would long have drastic left-wing political reforms, i guess.
Oh yes, because it's not like Nigel Farage, Victor Orban and a bunch of other populists didn't make use of US companies and advisors (and russian funds...) on how to best fracture societies to their end. Clearly nuking the internet would put an end to that, and all would be well.
Yes. You can impose as much laws as you can enforce them. Don't want your citizens to buy anything from me, stop shipments at your border. Want to stop payments, talk to your banks. Want to stop access to my servers, block them at your routers.
Why the fuck should I enforce your rules for you? You made them, you figure out how you will make them work.
you being the UK government, in this case.
You shouldn't... As you said, how are they going to make you?
That's kind of exactly my point? If China came to you and said you owe us fines, why would you voluntarily do so?
Why would a local Lemmy instance ever pay a fine to China?
Same way ofcom expects anyone outside UK to pay up, I guess.
You don't want to be locked in a small cell with 4chan for two years.
Not again.
They'll never control the hacker known as 4chan
I think 4chan is a pretty cool guy. Eh gets fined by the UK and doesn't afraid of anything.
All 4 of them face charges.
They could go after the owner. I believe he lives in Japan, all the UK has to do is send an extradition request to the Japanese government, bing bang boom all done.
Which they would laugh at. Even the Chinese government would laugh at such a request. It isn't something that is considered universally a crime, like robbery and murder, but the type of shit they are asking for is so fucking unprecedented and unreasonable it's stupid.
It would be like if the UK demanded that France immediately extradite all legal handgun owners in France (where handguns are legal) because it is a crime to possess one in Great Britain and therefore they are criminals. Makes no sense.
I have never seen this. It is on my list now
Is it even possible for Ofcom to legally fine 4chan for these issues? How does a company in the UK fine a US company?
It works the same way they can fine domestic businesses: Pay up or we'll stop you from doing any more business in this country.
In the context of a website like 4chan that means pay the fine or get blocked by every UK based ISP.
I don't think that would deter any of their user base.
I think this sentiment is common but misses some important things. First: the UK is a big market of internet users, so losing it is not insignificant. Second: most people will not bother with a VPN because it's annoying or costs money. Third: from the UK's perspective, banning non-compliant sites is a good thing.
Recognising all this is important, because it's part of resisting such censorious laws.
It isn't really an US company for say. It just conveniently claims itself an US company. The servers probably are not in the US
The argument 4chan uses is laughable. "Freedom of speech of every American?" Tere is no such protection in the US right now.
No one is watching the news? Trump is killing freedom of speech. Anyone dares to advocate equality is getting fired or estorcised. All rainbow, trans or minority rights signs are being eliminated. Our rainbow sidewalk in my city was repainted. Diversity programs are dismantled. Any minority names program is being renamed. Less black people are being hired in the white house than ever.
Even now som states require you to prove your identity before your can log into Internet.
American invention? American right? Lol.
I agree, but letting a foreign government dictate what you can and cannot say on your site is dangerous. If 4chan capitulates then countless other sites are on the chopping block.
This censorship shit is out of control.
Damn fucking straight. I hope it starts an privacy movement so big they realize that all the laws passed since 2000 against terrorism were abject failures and repeal all of them.
Canada is trying to pass major surveillance shit on par with the patriot act on steroids and effectively nullify the need for warrants, all in the name of 'strong borders' and anti terrorism even though it literally gives many US owned and operated companies full and complete access to digital information on Canadians, ironically weakening borders in every way.
And for what? What is the terrorism threat? Al-Qaeda was a always a joke, and the fact that 9/11 happened was far more due to a monumental failure of all intelligence services combined and not due to a lack of resources. Terrorist schemes have been thwarted in the past without the need for extensive surveillance... and most plots are still thwarted primarily by informants and insiders speaking to authorities. The whole 'we need to be super proactive ' has yielded shit results.
Most of the stuff that they claim was 'prevented proactively ' was literally entrapment. They found some mentally ill and/or lonely people who would have done nothing on their own, but ended up being goaded into stupid crap when undercover agents flirted with them, encouraged them, and even offered weapons and explosives for them to use, and if they agreed... well, that's when they nabbed them. No terrorism would have occurred if agents didn't do shit.
Have you ever wondered why so many people are highly distrustful of people talking about doing violent shit? Fed posting? Its because agents have such a long ass history of doing that that you cannot tell who is and who isn't a Fed.
4chan is likely using this to take it to the courts.
> be me
> mfw
The defense rests.
The thing is, an indeterminable amount of users (and admins!) are feds, so despite giving the appearance of lawlessness, it’s actually fully compliant!
Offcom has been drinking, came home in a blackout and committed domestic abuse of 4chan. Does Offcom even internet? Alternative plot twist, Offcom is trolling 4chan.
I wanna say that Offcom is doing a good job and trying to protect British people in good faith but I feel like they are being used as a cudgel by the British ruling class to advance an anachronistic agenda. Don't forget, they fired their expert drugs advisor for telling them that MDMA is comparable to horse riding in terms of safety. They want certain things to be true, regardless of the scientific accuracy.
It's ofcom but my phone desperately wants it to be Offcom for some reason
It's Ofcom, the Office of Communications. Not sure how they managed to get it wrong 4 times.
They have no way of making them pay.
Should Ofcom be labelled as a terrorist organisation ?
Probably why they didn't do it in the first place.
They barely pay for moderation. Who is going to pay for that survey? And also why would they? Obviously most of the people on that site are under 18. That's when I used it.
What other demographic clicks the horny ads they run?
I wonder if Ofcom's true goal is banning 4chan from the UK and if this is a just required part of the legal process for a ban...
Million is spelled with a M
4chan makes that much money?!?
At least a little?
According to this article they pull in 230 million a year. For a shitty forum that looks like it's run on 1995 tech
@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
go to feed...
The UK should just block sites that don't comply. They have no business trying to fine US websites.
save