Posted on 09/10/2025 10:58:50 AM PDT by Heartlander
SUMMARY
The Online Safety Act went into force in late July. Framed in the media as a child safety device, the is in fact far more sweeping, coming down on mis- and disinformation, “racially or religiously aggravated order offenses,” and content related to illegal immigration.
The legislation covers all internet companies, including social media platforms such as X and Meta as well as messaging services such as WhatsApp or Signal.
Under the enforcement section of the act, a platforms advertising, payment processing, and web hosting providers can be targeted too. Even if your company has no UK customers, it could still be targeted if it provides services for a company with a “significant number of UK users.”
The Online Safety Act does not stop at the shores of the British isles: its reach is global, with both large and small American companies likely to be targeted.
It is part of a wider pattern of foreign tech regulations that demand censorship of American platforms, including the European Union’s Digital Services Act, and the repeated attacks against American companies from Brazil’s judiciary.
In a recent post, X Global Government Affairs team warned that the aim’s of Brazil’s censorship orders is to “extend beyond its own jurisdiction and reach the world.” The free speech-friendly platform has similarly warned that the Online Safety Act “has a potential to set a precedent for global censorship, threatening privacy and free speech worldwide.”
Here are the ways in which Americans and American companies are impacted by the OSA:
The legislation seeks to ensure compliance by levying onerous financial penalties onto non-compliant companies. The Online Safety Act empowers UK’s online regulator, Ofcom, to levy fines up to £18 million or 10 percent of worldwide revenue on non-compliant companies, whichever is higher, similar to the European Union’s Digital Services Act.
American companies including the free speech-friendly platform Gab and internet culture pillar 4chan are already facing threats and fines from Ofcom. 4chan has responded to threatened fines with a lawsuit filed in U.S. courts, arguing that the OSA violates speech rights in the U.S. and that foreign companies have no obligation to comply.
“Foreign governments, particularly those in Europe, which have not managed to build technology sectors of their own have, for the past half-decade or more, sought to control the American Internet, and hobble American competitiveness, through a range of legislative and non-legislative initiatives,” the suit said.
Senior managers at companies found to be non-compliant with the law are subject to criminal penalties, with a maximum prison sentence of two years. That means the UK has the power to jail American tech employees for refusing to censor First Amendment protected speech. Any senior manager who happens to visit the UK while their company is non-compliant runs the risk of arrest.
This provision puts the UK on par with Brazil, which has arrested Meta executives for non-compliance with judicial orders to release private data on WhatsApp users.
You don’t have to be a social media platform to bear the brunt of the OSA’s provisions — if you merely work with a platform, by providing advertising, payment processing, web hosting, or some other service, you could face the same penalties as a platform. These include potential fines, criminal charges, and arrest. No matter how free speech friendly a platform is, the OSA can ensure it is only as strong as the weakest link in its digital supply chain.
A UK government explainer of the Act states, “In the most extreme cases, with the agreement of the courts, Ofcom will be able to require payment providers, advertisers and internet service providers to stop working with a site, preventing it from generating money or being accessed from the UK.”
In the legislative text, the bill states that Ofcom could apply to the court for a “service restriction order” to apply to a company that has “failed to comply with an enforceable requirement.”
The order stipulates that Ofcom will carry out its order to force a boycott of a service if the UK government believes that the company’s services would serve as a danger to UK citizens.
The Online Safety Act, according to Ofcom, provides four types of business disruption measures to ensure compliance. This includes:
The legislation is not simply for UK businesses, the restriction order could apply to any company “all companies in scope, no matter where they are based, where services have relevant links with the UK.”
There will come a point when Americans will not want to send their young men and women to defend Britain and Europe anymore, and that time is coming quickly.
Not even China or Russia do this to Americans and American companies.
The worst that China or Russia do is to set honey traps with beautiful girls.
Rather ironic they do this to “protect children” when they turn a blind eye to decades of child grooming and rape by Pakis in their country.
Americans will slowly realize that the present regimes/elites of London, Brussels and Davos are the real enemy.
We’re not there yet, but its coming.
We went to war over this in 1812.
Thought Crimes: are the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance and repressive regimentation of people and behavior within society.
London is the world’s central repository of transexual filth. A mixture of degenerate, depraved homosexual soy boys and Muslim rape gangs. Starmer is the UK dancing queen, always giving an invitation to his orifice by flexing his anal cavity to all the willing participants.
If the UK don’t like my claims then too damn bad. /spit
Try checking the prices of flights to Caracas and Havana on say Air Canada and Kayak. You can’t.
Flights to the UK could be cut off in the same way.
islam is a totalitarian death cult founded by a child rapist.
The don’t have standing. This is a repeat of the misguided over-reach of the British government toward Americans. Same sort of thing that led up to the war of 1812.
Doesn’t the US ultimately control IANA?
Can’t .uk be changed to /dev/null?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.