Waitman Gobble

Tue, 29 Jul 2025 22:07:18 -0400 from Get Ready To Rumbly

I took a look at the UK Online Safety Act 2023, with all the data collection, analysis and reporting duties it's probably much cheaper to ban users from the UK. Media reports focus on age verification.. but that's nothing compared to the amount of effort it would take to monitor and categorize and report all user generated content.

show all 15 comments

Waitman Gobble

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 23:29:25 -0400 last edited: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 23:53:30 -0400 from Get Ready To Rumbly

I'm thinking the only way one can comply in a federated / decentralized system is by shutting down.
actually anything determined as offensive including yahoo, google, cnn, etc, would have to restrict content to their own verified users. "porn" is just the beginning of this i think.

Not having local site users doesn't really matter.
It's a "win" for meta i guess.

i've heard people say they are going to use geo-fencing to block uk people, i personally dislike geo-fencing - but the facts are there is no authoritative current database of ip address, blocks are bought sold and transferred every day and databases lag behind months and years. Also, it presumes that protected citizens are within an ip (or geographical) block and use ISPs located within their geographic area, you know like dial-up and satellite. It blocks non-protected non-citizens as well as allows protected citizens who do not happen to be using the block. And of course VPNs are hot right now lol.

Opinion?

Bill Statler

Fri, 01 Aug 2025 00:29:29 -0400 from Bunny of Doom

A while back, IFTAS posted some info about how to comply with UK and EU laws, and I asked them: How does this affect me if I'm running an instance in the US? And I never got a satisfactory answer. Canada also passed some sort of "worldwide" law, and I'm sure other countries have too.

All I have is an opinion, and it's not based on legal knowledge. But I figure:

I am not in Country X.
My server is not in Country X.
I am not operating a business, and even if I were, I am not actively seeking customers in Country X.
Anyone who lives in, or is a citizen of, Country X, and who voluntarily interacts with an Internet service outside of Country X, ought to realize they have no reasonable expectation that Country X's laws will apply to that interaction.
Anyone who is using a federated system is expected to understand that they are voluntarily connecting to an international network.

I can spell this out in my legal terms of service if necessary.

But beyond that, all I care about is the practical risk of getting fined or arrested. Even under Trump, I don't believe the US would extradite me to another country for not complying with their Internet laws. I guess the situation would be different if I travelled internationally -- maybe I'd worry that the UK had put me on "The List" and I would get seized upon arrival. For me, with a 2-person instance, I think the risk is microscopic as of 2025.

In the long run, I have no idea. Maybe I'll need to worry which US states I fly through.

Waitman Gobble

Thu, 07 Aug 2025 03:47:00 -0400 from Get Ready To Rumbly

Reddit has been particularly aggressive in complying with OSA in the U.K., requiring age verification for access to subforums on subjects including Alcoholics Anonymous, medical cannabis, and menstruation.

The Internet Wants to Check Your I.D.

New safety rules require users to verify their identities before gaining access to sites. This spells the end of the relative anonymity that we’ve come to expect online.

i guess kids have to ask their parents.

Bill Statler

Thu, 07 Aug 2025 12:51:07 -0400 from Bunny of Doom

From IFTAS: Navigating the UK Online Safety Act - What Fediverse Service Providers Need to Know

If you operate a decentralised platform, the OSA may feel daunting. But for most community-run services, especially those that do not serve children and take steps to prohibit illegal material, compliance is both achievable and proportionate.

I'm not convinced.

Proportionality is a core principle of the Act and is in-built into its duties. As regulator for the online safety regime, Ofcom must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements.

My translation: Enforcement can be arbitrary, depending on the whim of the policing agency.

Your rules, community guidance, or terms of service should explicitly ban illegal material. These are the “priority illegal content” items:
Terrorism
Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA)
Grooming
Image-based Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM)
CSAM and CSEA URLs
Encouraging or assisting suicide
Hate
Harassment, stalking, threats and abuse
Controlling or coercive behaviour
Drugs and psychoactive substances
Firearms, knives or other weapons
Human trafficking
Unlawful immigration
Sexual exploitation of adults
Extreme pornography
Intimate image abuse
Proceeds of crime
Fraud and financial offences
Foreign interference
Animal cruelty

Illegal by what country's standards? What is "Hate"? What are we allowed to say about "Firearms, knives or other weapons", or "Unlawful immigration"?

Most general-purpose Fediverse platforms can truthfully state:
They do not have a significant number of child users.
Their service is not of a kind likely to attract a significant number of children.
If you can truthfully answer no to both Stage 2 questions, your child access assessment is done.

"Child" in the UK means under 18, so how can an instance "truthfully state" that they aren't attracting high school seniors?

I thank IFTAS for putting this information together, but compliance is still not easy -- and there's still no explanation of the conditions under which a non-UK instance might be required to comply.

Marshall Sutherland

Thu, 07 Aug 2025 12:54:23 -0400 from hubzilla

My translation: Enforcement can be arbitrary, depending on the whim of the policing agency.

If they decide they want to go after you, they will find an interpretation that lets them do it.