Here's a post from @iftas on navigating the Online Safety Act.
-
Here's a post from @iftas on navigating the Online Safety Act.
https://about.iftas.org/2025/07/30/navigating-the-uk-online-safety-act/
"Jaz attended TrustCon 2025, where Ofcom, along with many other national internet safety regulators, had a strong presence. He met with representatives, attended sessions, and had informal conversations about how the regulator views decentralised services.
Ofcom understands that independent platforms serve community needs and do not necessarily pose the same systemic risks as profit-driven networks. Their message was consistent: low-risk, volunteer-run services are not the focus of enforcement. If you are operating in good faith, acting proportionately, and keeping your community safe, you are already on the right path."
-
Here's a post from @iftas on navigating the Online Safety Act.
https://about.iftas.org/2025/07/30/navigating-the-uk-online-safety-act/
"Jaz attended TrustCon 2025, where Ofcom, along with many other national internet safety regulators, had a strong presence. He met with representatives, attended sessions, and had informal conversations about how the regulator views decentralised services.
Ofcom understands that independent platforms serve community needs and do not necessarily pose the same systemic risks as profit-driven networks. Their message was consistent: low-risk, volunteer-run services are not the focus of enforcement. If you are operating in good faith, acting proportionately, and keeping your community safe, you are already on the right path."
@thenexusofprivacy @iftas unfortunately it doesn't matter what the "focus of enforcement" is. Such platitudes are meaningless. The reality is that on multiple occasions, Ofcom spokespeople have said that the first contact they have with a non-compliant site operator will be for enforcement action. For small site operators, gambling on this isn't an option.
-
Here's a post from @iftas on navigating the Online Safety Act.
https://about.iftas.org/2025/07/30/navigating-the-uk-online-safety-act/
"Jaz attended TrustCon 2025, where Ofcom, along with many other national internet safety regulators, had a strong presence. He met with representatives, attended sessions, and had informal conversations about how the regulator views decentralised services.
Ofcom understands that independent platforms serve community needs and do not necessarily pose the same systemic risks as profit-driven networks. Their message was consistent: low-risk, volunteer-run services are not the focus of enforcement. If you are operating in good faith, acting proportionately, and keeping your community safe, you are already on the right path."
It may be worth mentioning that is how many autocracies work : they enact wide-ranging repressive laws, and then enforce them selectively.
A server that "keeps their community safe" will probably indeed not be targeted (note that they did not in any way say that those do not fall under the perimeter of this law) but if they start, let's say, documenting police violence, they may find themselves considered as "making their community unsafe".
-
It may be worth mentioning that is how many autocracies work : they enact wide-ranging repressive laws, and then enforce them selectively.
A server that "keeps their community safe" will probably indeed not be targeted (note that they did not in any way say that those do not fall under the perimeter of this law) but if they start, let's say, documenting police violence, they may find themselves considered as "making their community unsafe".
-
@thenexusofprivacy @iftas unfortunately it doesn't matter what the "focus of enforcement" is. Such platitudes are meaningless. The reality is that on multiple occasions, Ofcom spokespeople have said that the first contact they have with a non-compliant site operator will be for enforcement action. For small site operators, gambling on this isn't an option.
@ret @thenexusofprivacy @iftas Right - if fines and jail time are based on the number of millions of registered users, it'd be a fair risk for small services to take. But as obviously nothing of the sort are part of it's design, quite aside from legal costs to a small site challenged over compliance even if it comes out as clean, it's dangerous and damaging legislation. Small communities voices have been asking for consideration from the outset, and received nothing binding.
-
Here's a post from @iftas on navigating the Online Safety Act.
https://about.iftas.org/2025/07/30/navigating-the-uk-online-safety-act/
"Jaz attended TrustCon 2025, where Ofcom, along with many other national internet safety regulators, had a strong presence. He met with representatives, attended sessions, and had informal conversations about how the regulator views decentralised services.
Ofcom understands that independent platforms serve community needs and do not necessarily pose the same systemic risks as profit-driven networks. Their message was consistent: low-risk, volunteer-run services are not the focus of enforcement. If you are operating in good faith, acting proportionately, and keeping your community safe, you are already on the right path."
@thenexusofprivacy @iftas But if it's not explicitly written into the law a government can still use it to attack any social site they want.
-
@thenexusofprivacy @iftas But if it's not explicitly written into the law a government can still use it to attack any social site they want.
-
@ret @thenexusofprivacy @iftas Right - if fines and jail time are based on the number of millions of registered users, it'd be a fair risk for small services to take. But as obviously nothing of the sort are part of it's design, quite aside from legal costs to a small site challenged over compliance even if it comes out as clean, it's dangerous and damaging legislation. Small communities voices have been asking for consideration from the outset, and received nothing binding.
