The tin-pot internet police at Ofcom have fined US-based platform 4chan an unbelievable £520,000 (plus daily penalties of around £800) for repeatedly violating the Online Safety Act. They claim the site failed the OSA’s risk assessment duty, its illegal content safety duty, and its children’s safety duties. That’s half-a-million quid, please…
Below is 4chan lawyer Preston Byrne’s response email, which contains a picture of a giant hamster dressed as Godzilla:
Ofcom,
Thanks. As has been explained to your agency, ad nauseam, the United Kingdom lost the American Revolutionary War. We are not in the mood to discuss the matter further, and have not been in the mood for 250 years.
I note for the record that, last time your agency sent my client a censorship fine, we responded with a hamster joke. Since you have now sent my client a giant fine, a fine so large that Mr. Whiskers’ enclosure is not big enough to contain it, we will need to send the fine to Mr. Whiskers’ giant hamster cousin, Nigel J. Whiskerford. Unfortunately, Nigel is out of the country this week, touring in Japan. Here’s a picture of Nigel in Tokyo, dressed up as Godzilla and holding an equally giant peanut.
Isn’t he just the cutest?
My client reserves all rights and waives none. Reserved rights include the right to sue you again and/or to respond to future correspondence with an even larger rodent, such as a marmot.
Or, maybe, you could just stop sending Americans stupid letters and acknowledge the sovereignty of the United States.
Byrne & Storm
Doesn’t look like 4chan is playing ball…
UPDATE: 4Chan’s lawyer Preston Byrne tells Guido:
“Dame Melanie says that getting sued in the United States is a sign Ofcom is ‘having the impact it wants.’ If Ofcom’s desired impact was to inspire the first foreign censorship shield bill in American history, and a 46-12 supermajority vote to pass such a law the first time one was ever voted on by a sovereign American legislative body, then yes, Ofcom is having exactly the impact it wants.
American free speech activists will be back with more shield bills, in Wyoming and elsewhere, in 2027, if not sooner. Filing windows for numerous state legislatures are coming up in the autumn.
In the meantime, we await Ofcom’s fine with relish. Last time Ofcom fined 4chan, we replied with a hamster joke. Ofcom has advised us that it provisionally intends to issue a giant fine to 4chan. Accordingly, this time, we are planning to send Ofcom a joke about a giant hamster.
Increasing the size of an unconstitutional fine does not cure its legal invalidity in the United States. We can only suggest that Ofcom pare back its ambitions to UK-nexus targets, as it appears to be doing now, and as it should have been doing all along.”
Ofcom Chief Executive Melanie Dawes has inflamed the rhetorical (and legal) war against social media firms. Asked on the Today programme about ongoing legal action from US platform 4Chan – the first firm fined by Ofcom under the OSA – Dawes said legal action against the regulator is a good thing:
“We’ve seen quite a lot of pushback, but we expected that and we will use all the tools at our disposal to keep forcing through that change. I mean, it’s very difficult for me to talk about individual investigations. That one remains live… we’ve got significant legal pushback in the US, but I see that as a sign that we’re having the impact we want.”
In November Ofcom declared ‘sovereign immunity‘ in proceedings from 4Chan and has moved to dismiss the case. Dawes is clearly gearing up for legal clashes with more firms…
Ofcom wrote a threatening letter overnight to Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Roblox, and X, telling them that they aren’t doing enough to protect children online with checks. Dawes boasted about that too:
“I think they’re quite uncomfortable about this. We’ve given them a deadline of the end of April to come back to us. We’re strongly encouraging them to publish those letters when they come back to us. And whether they do or not, we will publish the responses in May. It’ll be a report card on the industry, on those six companies, and we will then follow up with enforcement action where we need to.”
The platforms themselves are bemused that Ofcom is going after them instead of so-called ‘higher risk’ platforms which veer much closer to illegal activity in the corners of the internet. Dawes is ploughing ahead anyway – it’s all-out war…
Labour peer and former minister Margaret Hodge is frontrunner to take over Ofcom as chairman, replacing Lord Grade whose term ended in April. Hodge has a closer past relationship with the Starmer family than many SW1 watchers will realise…
Previously unreported is her relationship to the Starmers. After qualifying as a solicitor in 2001 Lady Starmer worked for the law firm Hodge Jones & Allen while Hodge was a minister. The firm, founded in 1977 by the late Henry Hodge (late husband of Margaret), boasts a “strong set of ethical values that permeate throughout the firm.” Guido hopes that proximity got declared…
Hodge is anti-online anonymity and has a chequered record on online safety. She is 81 years old – Labour thinks she’s right for this huge role despite forcing 80-year-old peers out of the House of Lords…
Former Tory Culture Secretary Jeremy Wright is also in the running and has made criticisms of Ofcom for its execution of the Online Safety Act. The regulator has erected Starmer’s internet firewall with no brakes…
The government is extending Ofcom’s powers to cover video-on-demand streaming services. Another innovation they couldn’t leave alone…
Secondary legislation through the Media Act 2024 will drag streamers with over 500,000 users under Ofcom’s enhanced ‘Tier 1’ remit. Think Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, ITVX, Channel 4…
They will now be subject to basically the same rules as a legacy broadcaster. Audiences have to be “protected against harmful or offensive material,” and can complain to Ofcom if they see something concerning. Ofcom will have powers to investigate and punish breaches of its code. ‘Impartiality’ requirements will go into place. New accessibility requirements will come into force too:
“Services will need to ensure that at least 80% of their total catalogue is subtitled, 10% is audio-described, and 5% is signed.”
Lisa Nandy claims: “By bringing the most popular video-on-demand services under enhanced regulation by Ofcom, we are strengthening protections for audiences, creating a level playing field for industry and supporting our vibrant media sector that continues to innovate and drive growth across the UK.” Level playing field = stagnation speak…
Labour peer Margaret Hodge is among the candidates vying to be the next Ofcom chairman, due for appointment this April. She has been tipped as the front runner to lead the self-appointed internet sheriffs. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall will make the final decision…
Back in 2003, when Hodge was minister for children, she had to give a formal apology in the High Court and make a £30,000 payment for describing a former child abuse victim, Demetrious Panton, as an “extremely disturbed person” when she was Islington council leader. In 2014, Hodge apologised again after police uncovered possible evidence that Jimmy Savile sexually assaulted vulnerable children in a care home in Islington. She said sorry for her “shameful naivety” in ignoring the pleas of victims of paedophiles…
In the 2024 election, Hodge was spotted campaigning for Labour with Peter Mandelson in Islington. Most worryingly Hodge campaigned for the government to ban online anonymity or make social media directors personally liable for defamatory posts back in 2020. Trump’s free speech internet portal for Europeans can’t come soon enough…
The self-appointed internet sheriffs at Ofcom have provided an update on their investigation into X over potential violations of the Online Safety Act. They confirm they’ve sent ‘legally binding information requests’, and remind everyone they can impose a fine if X fails to comply…
“…we are currently gathering and analysing evidence to determine whether X has broken the law, including using our formal information-gathering powers. The week after we launched our investigation, we sent legally binding information requests to X, to make sure we have the information we need from the company, and further requests continue to be sent.
Firms are required, by law, to respond to all such requests from Ofcom in an accurate, complete and timely way, and they can expect to face fines if they fail to do so.”
Ofcom adds that while it is not yet investigating Grok provider xAi, it is considering looking into how Grok managed age checks relating to pornography. It also insists the investigation is being prioritised “as a matter of urgency” given the public interest. Meanwhile the Parisian police are currently rifling through the bins over in X’s French offices…
Speaking at his speech on how to achieve “progressive capitalism” Wes Streeting fired a dig and Andy Burnham:
“Bond markets are not bond villains and fiscal rules matter.”
