That's already the case today. The legislation introduces one more weapon to an already overflowing arsenal of weapons accessible by malicious actors. A motivated attacker willing to upload CSAM to a website to hypothetically trigger catastrophic consequence from Ofcom doesn't need this new legislation, they can do that today. There is already a meaningful amount of risk associated with running a website on the internet. A disgruntled troll can already cause a website operator to be killed which is a much greater existential risk than an Ofcom investigation.
I was once threatened by someone who used one of my websites, a few weeks later he was arrested because he attempted to murder a bunch of people at a school (he failed but it's the thought that counts). That's the sort of things you deal with as a person who angers nerds on the internet and that's an existential threat regardless of the ability to shield yourself from legal liability. Anyone invoking the angry, vengeful troll as an explanation for why this law is bad is probably inexperienced with real angry, vengeful trolls. An idiot weaponising poorly defined legislation that I'm protected from due to limited liability is a welcome vacation from the truly dangerous and vengeful trolls.
The reason our lives aren't ruined by trolls is not the absence of bad legislation but the absence of motivation on the part of the trolls. For every one person willing to commit an atrocity, there are millions of people who, at their worst, will write some angry words. The greatest protection we have is the disinterest most people have in revenge. The reason my life hasn't been ruined over the years by all the people who considered me an enemy because I told them off for saying bad words on an internet forum is not because Ofcom didn't have poorly thought out legislation, it's because the number of people who actually want to ruin my life is so vanishingly small and they're about as competent at life-ruining as they are abiding by forum rules.
If someone wants to destroy you using the law, they can today. If someone wants to destroy you and is willing to act outside of the law, they can today. I wish that everyone was right, that without this legislation our livelihoods are safe from the ire of angry nerds, but alas, they are not, we're no more and no less sitting ducks with this legislation.
The problem with the OSA is that limited liability through a corporation don't help you as much as you think it does, also Velocio has dealt with angry trolls with an address before so maybe revise your assumptions some, but otherwise again you make a lot of good points.
That's already the case today. The legislation introduces one more weapon to an already overflowing arsenal of weapons accessible by malicious actors. A motivated attacker willing to upload CSAM to a website to hypothetically trigger catastrophic consequence from Ofcom doesn't need this new legislation, they can do that today. There is already a meaningful amount of risk associated with running a website on the internet. A disgruntled troll can already cause a website operator to be killed which is a much greater existential risk than an Ofcom investigation.
I was once threatened by someone who used one of my websites, a few weeks later he was arrested because he attempted to murder a bunch of people at a school (he failed but it's the thought that counts). That's the sort of things you deal with as a person who angers nerds on the internet and that's an existential threat regardless of the ability to shield yourself from legal liability. Anyone invoking the angry, vengeful troll as an explanation for why this law is bad is probably inexperienced with real angry, vengeful trolls. An idiot weaponising poorly defined legislation that I'm protected from due to limited liability is a welcome vacation from the truly dangerous and vengeful trolls.
The reason our lives aren't ruined by trolls is not the absence of bad legislation but the absence of motivation on the part of the trolls. For every one person willing to commit an atrocity, there are millions of people who, at their worst, will write some angry words. The greatest protection we have is the disinterest most people have in revenge. The reason my life hasn't been ruined over the years by all the people who considered me an enemy because I told them off for saying bad words on an internet forum is not because Ofcom didn't have poorly thought out legislation, it's because the number of people who actually want to ruin my life is so vanishingly small and they're about as competent at life-ruining as they are abiding by forum rules.
If someone wants to destroy you using the law, they can today. If someone wants to destroy you and is willing to act outside of the law, they can today. I wish that everyone was right, that without this legislation our livelihoods are safe from the ire of angry nerds, but alas, they are not, we're no more and no less sitting ducks with this legislation.