This is already impacting futurology.today - one of the Mods is British, and because of this law doesn’t feel comfortable continuing. As they have back-end expertise with hosting, if they go, we may have to shut down the whole site.
How easy is it to block British IP addresses? Would that be enough to circumvent any legal issues, if no one else involved in running the site is British and it is hosted somewhere else in the world?
If you’re using cloudflare you can block counties via that.
I’m also in the UK and run an instance - the problem is that the guidance is too large and overbearing. The stuff that actually mattered hadn’t even been released by OFCOM last time I bothered looking, such as the risk assessment.
I guess we’ll know more when they release the guidance on age verification - that will be what kills most sites off if they insist its required for all social media
the problem is that the guidance is too large and overbearing.
This.
Who gets to decide what “self-harm” is? There’ll be some busybodies who’ll say that any remotely positive messaging for LGBTQ youth is ‘self-harm’ for them.
It sounds like British politicians are the ones deciding harmful content, no?
So this will probably go exactly how you’re expecting, in the long term.
Exactly. Don’t get me wrong, meta and X are a cesspool without moderation or a thought for the users wellbeing, and deserve tidying up. But it’s going to kill spaces where people can express themselves, and drive UK users underground.
Now would be a good time to start a VPN business targeted to UK users. Actually…
anything teenagers actually want to do and enjoy doing is self-harm, haven’t you gotten the memo that adults know in 100% of all cases what’s good for them a lot better than they themselves do
(To any reader unironically agreeing with the above paragraph, I suggest reading this webcomic.)
Thanks, we’ll keep track of what they are doing.
Does it really, practically, impact things?
If people had to obey the law of “every country that has any internet presence”, site operators worldwide would have to do such silly things as ban women from using the internet while not sitting right next to their husbands, or who knows what other silly things as per the Sharia. So I don’t really see how any such thing is to be taken at anything but grandposturing from boomer political parties, at face value.
Now, if you want to ban Bri’ish IP addresses, your hosting can take care of that. For the most capable ones it’s just a flip of a switch. But do consider that in some cases that makes your site worse for everyone else worldwide as such rules are sometimes implemented via privacy-invading systems (eg.: yet another control that makes your site depend on Cloudflare).
I’m not a Brit (but worried similar stuff is coming here to America), but it sounds like you have to enforce those rules. Theoretically, from my high level understanding, would it be enough to have those rules in place, and when reported actively remove the content as a mod?
I can’t tell exactly, but it sounds like the biggest thing is that there needs to be a way to remove the content quickly, which we have. Facebook is obviously an offender, where they have a “process” but it takes days and as we all know, 99% of the time they don’t actually do anything.
As a higher more automated level, I’m guessing our automod stuff that most of us admins are using would probably be enough, or if not that some basic AI models.
It doesn’t sound like they expect it to be perfect, here in the states they don’t expect me to be perfect, but they damn well expect me to follow correct process if I do become aware of something. It’s essentially A) I need to take reasonable preventative measures, like actively moderating, doing what I can automatically, banning bad users and removing content when needed and then B) Immediately taking action if I do become aware of anything, keeping evidence for the feds.
would it be enough to have those rules in place, and when reported actively remove the content as a mod?
We’re pretty good with daily moderating of content on futurology.today, so I’d be confident we could cover that aspect.
However I’m wondering about federation issues. Are we liable for UK users who use their futurology.today account to access other instances we don’t mod?
That’s a good point, and I don’t know. My gut says no, it would be on the other instance owner, but obviously I’m not a lawyer or anything
I have no idea about how people in the UK should react and I’m not a lawyer, but my understanding of it is that if no one involved in running your site is British, it’s not hosted in the UK, and you don’t have any kind of business relationships with people in the UK, you absolutely should not worry about it or take any action at all beyond making sure you don’t sign any deals or offer any products for sale in that country.
They cannot legally or practically do anything to you beyond perhaps blocking access to your site somehow I suppose, and in the extremely unlikely event that they tried something crazy you’d be an international cause celebre with plenty of legal support available. Doing their dirty work for them by trying to block British IP addresses seems inadvisable.
This is already impacting futurology.today - one of the Mods is British, and because of this law doesn’t feel comfortable continuing. As they have back-end expertise with hosting, if they go, we may have to shut down the whole site.
Its good news that they are merely a mod and not an admin / op, then! That’s why documenting and transfer of knowledge is important! If they don’t feel capable of dealing with a stupid law, they should make themselves unnecessary to your community ASAP! Have them prepare to step down from the role by documenting everything that a replacement needs to be able to do, then as soon as another mod can test that the documentation works, derole them if that’s what they want.
I misphrased, they are an Admin/Op, and essential.
Even more important then to get them deessentialized if they’re already feeling like leaving.
Simple. Don’t be a company. Companies exist to sell stuff: the fediverse doesn’t. There are a few other structures in the UK alone to circumvent this potential law, which is designed to combat large social media companies. And it won’t affect outside the UK either, and with brexit - will anyone else bother enforcibg?
that’s the thing. You don’t have to be a company or resident of the UK.
If you have a community (classic forum, lemmy, masto etc) that caters to a “significant part” to UK users, you are target of the act.
And depending on where you live, extraditions to the UK for criminal charges exist.
Will anyone bother doing that? We’ll see
Edit: In case people want to read the law themselves: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/4
I don’t believe it would target any of the fediverse currently. No instances have significant volumes of users or target markets. This is designed to target facebooks, tik-toks, and twitters. Services that do influence populations. Essentially, making these services actually responsible for their algorithmic output and akin to publishers in the UK
intended target and possible target are different things.
The law, as it exists, targets any and all communities with “a significant number of United Kingdom users”. There is no minimum size requirement.
It might be possible that the law turns a blind eye on smaller communities. But it might not. They are in their right to go against a 20 user fediverse instance the same way as they are against facebook
So with british law, the intent of the law is as important as the written texts. Listen to the debates which can and are used by judges from the commons and the lords to decide upon intent. It’s not for tiny forums, but I’m also not a lawyer. Significant most likely relates to not just user count, but also other reporting from other media, it’s significance of significant users, anonymity, and ability to break bigger stories. Try codifying any of that (and more!) in a law
deleted by creator
