Ofcom Concedes Defeat in the 4chan Case

A lawyer representing 4chan reports that Ofcom effectively admitted its limits when testifying that its enforcement powers stop where foreign courts’ jurisdiction begins, after U.S. courts signaled they would be hostile to enforcing Ofcom fines. In 4chan v. Ofcom, the U.S. District Court observed that plaintiffs with no U.S. presence could invoke American constitutional protections and that U.S. courts routinely decline to enforce foreign judgments that clash with the First Amendment or that are penal in nature. That legal view, coupled with practical enforcement barriers, leaves Ofcom with little realistic path to collect fines in the United States.

Rather than abandoning its campaign, Ofcom is expected to ask Parliament for “interim business disruption measures” - pre‑enforcement powers to block foreign websites inside the UK - a proposal previously rejected and subject to circumvention by VPNs. The lawyer says his client is prepared to be blocked and frames the dispute as part of a broader struggle against foreign censorship agencies seeking to reach American soil: Ofcom has targeted roughly 200 U.S. platforms, only four refused compliance, and only 4chan held out. The piece urges UK opponents to resist expanded Ofcom powers and calls on U.S. policymakers to guard against foreign censorship encroaching on First Amendment protections.