UK Online Safety Regulations and impact on Forums

One thing I’ve noticed is people throw around the term “free speech” without actually knowing what it is especially as related to the 1st amendment.

IMO it is nothing to do with forums or whether people allow or disallow racist comments or otherwise offensive comments on their forum.
MentaL said:
I've always thought the terms "hate speech," or in your case, "racist speech," are artificial. I've never quite understood them. I view it differently—as speech that someone hates, rather than the broad concepts of racism or antisemitism that these terms often represent.
Click to expand...
I would have thought the term "racist speech" is easy to comprehend. Hate speech is broader but still a fairly simple thing to understand. Offensive text which targets or attacks a group or an individual person because of who they are (e.g based on race, religion, disability or gender).

ie it's not just speech someone hates - there's plenty of that - mostly when people who who say less instead of fewer :)

I wouldn't mind betting that if you were to use hate speech here on xenforo.com it would be moderated and likely to get your account restricted or banned depending on how bad it was.
 
Last edited:
Mr Lucky said:
I would have thought the term "racist speech" is easy to comprehend. Hate speech is broader but still a fairly simple thing to understand. Offensive text which targets or attacks a group or an individual person because of who they are (e.g based on race, religion, disability or gender).
Click to expand...
Actually, from what I have seen, 99.9% of people get "racist" speech wrong.

Prejudice, bias, bigotry, and racism are different things, yet most people lump them all as racism (or racist).
 
If people are concerned about using the DM system at all, maybe a more measured approach is to moderate DMs and make it clear in the privacy policy that this happens. This would put off people posting illegal text or content.

I have always been concerned about the possibility of people doing that. Although by default Admins cannot view DMs so illegal text can be going on, but we have always been able to see image attachments.

I imagine any illegal DM activity might be more to do with images than text.

If someone posted kiddie porn images there's good chance I'd know as I do look at attachments from time to time. AI to monitor it? yes that could be good. But it wouldn't help with linked images though.
 
1734700222646.webp
There is a report function in the direct messages :) if someone has a concern they can use it. I don't think we are fully responsible for direct messages unless someone reports it.
 
Mr Lucky said:
I believe so, but I'm talking about previous posts where it seems we may become responsible in the future, or am I misunderstanding?
Click to expand...
I cannot generalise for the UK, but in many countries laws are valid from the date of publication. It does not apply before that date. I hope this law is valid in this way. In that case we are not responsible for old messages. Otherwise, instead of analysing hundreds of thousands of messages, many people will set up a forum from scratch :D
 
alfaNova said:
It does not apply before that date. I hope this law is valid in this way.
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem so:

from 17 March 2025, sites and apps will then need to start implementing safety measures to mitigate those risks, and our codes set out measures they can take.[4]
alfaNova said:
In that case we are not responsible for old messages.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about public posts or DMs? I would have thought most responsible forums would have moderated any illegal content in posts already. With further reading it doesn't seem this regulation is as draconian as has been implied in places.
 
So the real question is, how can I use Cloudflare to block access to the UK from being able to login or register on my site, and is that enough, or do I need to block access to my site completely?
 
I think everyone's exaggerating. Hate speech is a crime in most countries, it is not unique to the UK. I added quick GPT answer below but I didn't dive deep detail. Contrary to popular belief, there is a very thick boundary between freedom of expression (speech) and hate speech.
In Europe, hate speech is criminalized in several countries, each with its own legal framework. For instance, in Turkey, Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code addresses "incitement to hatred and hostility," categorizing certain hate speech acts as criminal offenses.

In the United Kingdom, hate speech is addressed through various laws that prohibit expressions of hatred based on race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, and transgender identity. The Public Order Act 1986, for example, criminalizes acts intended to stir up racial hatred.

In France, hate speech laws are stringent, with the Penal Code criminalizing defamation and insults based on race, religion, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. The French legal system has prosecuted individuals for hate speech, as seen in cases adjudicated by the European Court of Human Rights.

Belgium also enforces laws against hate speech. Notably, in the case of Féret v. Belgium, the European Court of Human Rights upheld the conviction of a politician for distributing leaflets that incited hatred against non-European immigrants, demonstrating Belgium's commitment to combating hate speech.

Germany has robust hate speech laws, particularly concerning Holocaust denial and incitement to racial hatred. The German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch) includes provisions that criminalize such expressions to prevent the spread of extremist ideologies.

It's important to note that while many European countries have laws criminalizing hate speech, the definitions and scope of these laws vary. The European Commission has recognized the need for a unified approach and has proposed extending the list of EU crimes to include hate speech and hate crime, aiming for a more consistent legal framework across member states.

Overall, the criminalization of hate speech in Europe reflects a commitment to protecting individuals and groups from expressions that incite hatred, discrimination, or violence, though the specific legal provisions differ from country to country.

commission.europa.eu

Extending EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime

The Commission initiative to include hate speech and hate crime in the list of “EU crimes” in the Treaty.
commission.europa.eu commission.europa.eu
Click to expand...

I am sure most people know the difference, but two examples from daily life.
  • Freedom of Speech:
    Imagine you’re at a meeting, and someone expresses their opinion about a political issue, saying, "I believe that we should invest more in renewable energy." This is an example of freedom of speech, where they are voicing their personal thoughts without causing harm or promoting violence.
  • Hate Speech:
    On the other hand, if someone at the same meeting says, "People from certain countries don’t belong here and shouldn’t be allowed to live in our city," this would be considered hate speech. It promotes hatred and discrimination against a group of people based on their nationality, which is harmful and unacceptable in most societies.
 
Last edited:
alfaNova said:
Hate Speech:
On the other hand, if someone at the same gathering says, "People from certain countries don’t belong here and shouldn’t be allowed to live in our city," this would be considered hate speech. It promotes hatred and discrimination against a group of people based on their nationality, which is harmful and unacceptable in most societies.
Click to expand...
In the US though, my understanding is that would just be classed as free speech. Unless it incites a riot or illegal acts. Unlikely at a family gathering.

But purely out of interest, who here would allow such a statement on their forum to go unmoderated?
 
Mr Lucky said:
In the US though, my understanding is that would just be classed as free speech. Unless it incites a riot or illegal acts. Unlikely at a family gathering.

But purely out of interest, who here would allow such a statement on their forum to go unmoderated?
Click to expand...
I assume that no one. And let me correct myself as "meeting" in my previous message to express myself better.
 
alfaNova said:
Is there any admin here not following these recommendations? I think we do not need to be worry for this regulation unless you are managing an illegal forum.
Click to expand...
I think practically no one can follow these laws (not recommendations) fully and everyone is at risk of these penalties. It seems to me that XenForo does not yet have the functionality to comply. Especially for big boards. It seems that these UK rules flow from the EU directives. Please see this suggestion:
Alpha1

Thread 'Better functionality to report and moderate illegal hate speech'

As the first EU nation has now approved a bill to impose hefty multimillion fines on communities for not removing abusive content within 24 hours, we are in dire need of better functionality for content flagging, reporting and moderation. More information below.
We need to have functionality to:
  1. Have members and guests flag abusive content and define exactly what type of problem the content has.
    For example by selecting the type of rule breach from a drop down on the report interface.
  2. Have the content moderated if the content falls in the category hate speech, flaming, slander...
  • Alpha1
  • abuse content flagging eu law fake news flaming hate speech report center report function reporting slaunder
  • Replies: 58
  • Forum: XenForo suggestions
  • Like
  • Love
The suggestion is old and new technologies offer new possibilities. But the gist of the suggestion is still very much valid.

In regards to AI: it probably can be used to scan all content for rule breaches IF the AI is fed with very clear site rules first. If the AI finds a post in breach of the rules, then it could be put in moderated state for a human to review. But this would require either XF to implement such or an addon to become available. AI scanning would incur costs.
 
JamesBrown said:
I can see the levels of hysteria building here :) It's reminding me of the months of posts about GDPR, remember those,:rolleyes: where the best-case scenario was we were all going to die a horrible death.
Click to expand...
It's a valid observation insofar as the number of forums financially penalised is close to none as far as I'm aware although some have had warnings. I do however think it's worth noting that the financial penalties for sites both large and small that have found to be in breach are not to be dismissed lightly, the largest to date being over a billion euros with many others fined millions. Even small sites have incurred some pretty harsh penalties.

I think it's far to early to say what impact the UK's Online Safety Regulations might have forums both large and small but I do think there's every reason for site owners to be aware of their obligations and try to comply with them no matter what we may think.
 
I'd say it would include all the social media platforms too?

Because really there are some airheads on there that shouldn't even be on there.
 
Trudeau has an Online Harms bill for Canada. It's already being ripped apart as unconstitutional. He'll be lucky to survive as PM for a few more days. You start messing with people's internet and they'll vote you out.
 
Mr Lucky said:
I don't believe either of those are cast iron protection in any jurisdiction if a prosecutor has all guns blazing, at least not without very expensive legal representation.
Click to expand...
Speaking for the US only, it would probably get thrown out in a lower court with all the precedence set around Section 230 already. You could probably even do it pro se, pointing out all the sites that have Section 230 protection in comparison to what is being prosecuted against. (I'd still advise a lawyer unless you're a corporation, and in that case, just dissolve if you lose if you don't have enough to fight it).

As far as the UK, it would take a US judge to give them the power to prosecute, which they most likely wouldn't allow to proceed because of 230; and if it weren't like that, I would throw a UK summons or fine out in the harbor just like their tea.
 
If you're so worried about all these things, simply restructure your corporation if you have more than 1 forum. Have a holding company and each forum its own company owned by the holding company. When, and if, they go after a forum, sell it off to another company, that you obviously own. You could have them chasing you in court for years, tying up the legal system, to the point where a teeny forum isn't worth gunning for.

Play the lawfare game with them. Just be better at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom