4 ms·

It is getting really hard to follow their logic. A some point, if you do not have any relationship with the UK, go as far as blocking its residents but they st

It is getting really hard to follow their logic. A some point, if you do not have any relationship with the UK, go as far as blocking its residents but they still want you to abide by their law, aren't they just declaring war on the entire world? This is something very deranged that have become very common with the world "becoming smaller": somes will go on a rampage for something happening on the other side of the planet. At the same time they will pretend not to notice that their own house in on fire.

arlcode 11mo ago
Of course not. But this is very useful to a) show they are enforcing this shiny new law and b) lay the legal groundwork that blocking it on their side (thruough UK ISPs) is warranted.
gpm 11mo ago
> A some point, if you do not have any relationship with the UK, go as far as blocking its residents but they still want you to abide by their law Ofcom appears to agree that geoblocking UK residents would satisfy the requirements of this law. They also however appear to believe the OPs clients are simply lying about actually geoblocking UK residents - and Ofcom appear's to be the quasi-judicial entity which decides (at least as a first step). I can't imagine OP's response to Ofcom that "we aren't doing that, but we won't explain what we were doing when we created the domain you think we created to do that" was particularly convincing. > aren't they just declaring war on the entire world? No, that would only happen if they started attempting to enforce the law by going into "the entire world" by force. Just declaring that some foreign entity broke your laws and owes you money and maybe that you'll arrest them if they come to your country isn't an act of war. Acts of war look like drone striking alleged drug smugglers in some other countries territorial waters without that other countries permission.
- Hizonner 11mo ago
  > They also however appear to believe the OPs clients are simply lying about actually geoblocking UK residents They don't seem to claim that. They claim the block is imperfect, and they demand perfection. Since perfection is in fact impossible, that means there's no reasonable, actually available action you can take to keep them from fining you, or at least trying to.
  - gpm 11mo ago
    No, I think they were pretty explicit > In our email dated 13 October 2025, we explained that Ofcom would be taking steps to monitor the voluntary block of users with UK IP addresses implemented by sanctionedsuicide.site and sanctioned- suicide.net on 1 July 2025. > Ofcom has become aware that the voluntary block in place on the above two websites restricting users with UK IP addresses from accessing these domains is no longer effective to restrict UK users from accessing the service or its content. In particular, we note that content from the service remains accessible to users with UK IP addresses at another domain, namely https://dignifiedexit.com https://dignifiedexit.com. This isn't a dispute about effectiveness, this a dispute about whether or not OP's client spun up another domain and didn't block UK users from it.
JoshTriplett 11mo ago
What they seem to be trying to do is declare war on individual sites, on behalf of activist lobbying, in the hopes that they can destroy those sites despite lacking jurisdiction over them.

arlcode 11mo ago

Of course not. But this is very useful to a) show they are enforcing this shiny new law and b) lay the legal groundwork that blocking it on their side (thruough UK ISPs) is warranted.

gpm 11mo ago

> A some point, if you do not have any relationship with the UK, go as far as blocking its residents but they still want you to abide by their law Ofcom appears to agree that geoblocking UK residents would satisfy the requirements of this law. They also however appear to believe the OPs clients are simply lying about actually geoblocking UK residents - and Ofcom appear's to be the quasi-judicial entity which decides (at least as a first step). I can't imagine OP's response to Ofcom that "we aren't doing that, but we won't explain what we were doing when we created the domain you think we created to do that" was particularly convincing. > aren't they just declaring war on the entire world? No, that would only happen if they started attempting to enforce the law by going into "the entire world" by force. Just declaring that some foreign entity broke your laws and owes you money and maybe that you'll arrest them if they come to your country isn't an act of war. Acts of war look like drone striking alleged drug smugglers in some other countries territorial waters without that other countries permission.

Hizonner 11mo ago
> They also however appear to believe the OPs clients are simply lying about actually geoblocking UK residents They don't seem to claim that. They claim the block is imperfect, and they demand perfection. Since perfection is in fact impossible, that means there's no reasonable, actually available action you can take to keep them from fining you, or at least trying to.
- gpm 11mo ago
  No, I think they were pretty explicit > In our email dated 13 October 2025, we explained that Ofcom would be taking steps to monitor the voluntary block of users with UK IP addresses implemented by sanctionedsuicide.site and sanctioned- suicide.net on 1 July 2025. > Ofcom has become aware that the voluntary block in place on the above two websites restricting users with UK IP addresses from accessing these domains is no longer effective to restrict UK users from accessing the service or its content. In particular, we note that content from the service remains accessible to users with UK IP addresses at another domain, namely https://dignifiedexit.com https://dignifiedexit.com. This isn't a dispute about effectiveness, this a dispute about whether or not OP's client spun up another domain and didn't block UK users from it.

JoshTriplett 11mo ago

What they seem to be trying to do is declare war on individual sites, on behalf of activist lobbying, in the hopes that they can destroy those sites despite lacking jurisdiction over them.