• WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    First, that the definition of content that is considered “adult” doesn’t necessarily mean every forum qualifies. Privacyguides.org likely would not. A car forum likely would not. Facebook must comply because links shared can be “harmful” anywhere on the platform. The fractured nature of Web 1.0 is a feature now, not a bug.

    if it were so easy. you can post links to the privacyguides forum too. but the bigger problem is that anyone can post anything. if they don’t do age verification, they are liable for any forbidden content that slipped through. that can also be used as a form of blackmailing.

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Sure you can post links, but that’s not the topic of the forum, and it’s not specific the a xountrybor market, which is also a factor right now with the UK law, so it doesnt ping as a problem worth dealing with.

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I’ve read what seems like 30+ articles and explainers about the UK law the last few days - this has some lousy (official) defintions. I think the most recent episode of Power User with Taylor Lorenz might cover some of this enough to get the overall sense.

          The topics under scrutiny of the “user-to-user” site is extremely vague beyond obvious porn, but it amounts to if it allows the sharing of links of basic news of any topic, it counts. Because in terms of categorizing “harmful content” for minors, seeing fucking protests happening anywhere, at all is “controversial adult content.” But if the links are limited to a very specific topic, say Honda Ridgeline owners, privacy and cyber nerd shit no one cares about) etc., cooking, and other innocuous things, it’s a grey zone that doesn’t demand compliance. YMMV, but even for a fascist wannabe set of policies can’t justify “harmful” material for kids with a Linux forum or a forum for owners of the Honda Ridgeline (WTF?)

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            ok but my point is that if someone posts a protest article link to the honda forum, then, as I understand, the forum will become legally liable for that too. so if the forum guarantee that the link won’t even get publicly visible for a second, that’s when they don’t need to do age verification

            • hansolo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              51 minutes ago

              Forums have mods and admins. As long as they don’t allow a topic habitually then, per my understanding for the UK law right now, that would make it exempt.

              Compliance with the ID law is actually quite expensive if you contract Persona as the ID checker. If 1 user of a site not based in tje UK or about UK things posting 1 news article a mod deletes in 10 minutes is enough to trigger a $50,000 compliance contact, then it’s enough to be amazing standing for an easily won lawsuit about burdens on small business.