LFGSS and Microcosm shutting down 16th March 2025 (the day before the Online Safety Act is enforced)

So you get everyone to use Tor.

Aa a non user, what would this involve?

I haven't used Tor/Onion in forever, I'm sure it's all changed now. But it was very straightforward, I logged in and that was that.

Downloading the TOR browser, that's it.
I'm not sure id encourage people en masse to use tor or the darknet. It's concerning how quickly and easily you can come across quite nasty stuff without going looking for it

First I'm not trying to change your decision. It is for you to decide of course!

Just that I'm not sure if you have accurate information as the basis of it. Once you have more accurate information then you can make your decision better.

So that's the only reason for replying again also. I may not have read the situation correctly but if you are interested in more information then this message may help.

But you didn't focus on the risk of criminal liability faced by officers of the entity, which breaks the Ltd structure of a company or a CIC

I did cover the criminality issue in case you missed it. I don't see any need to become a limited company anyway which is a hassle, if the maximum fine is a proportion of your small turnover.

On criminality

But it would be astonishing if they were to spend time fining never mind a court case to imprison someone who does this voluntarily a few hours a month.

I also talked about the many steps they have before they would fine you.

I don't see how it would be criminal if someone in one of your forums shared something you didn't know about and you didn't take it down in time. That would be very hard to establish as criminal surely. Again you should get advice on this if you want to follow it up, I'm not a lawyer or anything.

But with you not even having any evidence of anyone using your forums to share Child Sexual Abuse Material - then when you go through the tool you will likely be asked if anything like that has been shared on your forums and answer no. It will surely rate you as very low risk.

A page or two ago I gave a real-World example of an event that happened on this site when a person who could easily be argued to be vulnerable, faked their own death and attempt to fund-raise for their own funeral... this ticks so many of the "harmful but not illegal" boxes

This wouldn't be harmful to kids so I don't see it as relevant. The Online Safety Bill is about reducing serious risks such as suicide from things that are harmful to kids but not illegal but it doesn't work the other way around that anything that potentially might have small harm to kids is covered. I think when you go through that tool that this wouldn't be something you need to mention.

the argument of "they are understaffed so will only focus on the big tech" rings empty to me,

That wasn't the argument. It is that they would focus on the cases that have most impact for optimal use of their resources including funding. They would focus on the big social media companies. They would just not be expected to and wouldn't have the funding to investigate small organizations like yourself.

You can get an idea of their focus by looking at their complete list of the organizations they fined for various offences, and the amount of the fines in 2024 and 2023.

In 2024 so far they have fined four organizations. TikTok, GB News and BT

GB News £100,000 31 October 2024
TikTok £1,875,000 24 July 2024
BT £17,500,000 22 July 2024
BT £2,800,000 22 May 2024
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/annual-reports-and-plans/other-financial-reporting

In 2023 they fined
BT £2,800,000 22 May 2024
Big City Radio £1,200 24 March 2024
Shell Energy Retail Limited (Shell Energy) £1,400,000 21 November 2023
Royal Mail £5,600,000 13 November 2023
Islam Channel Limited £40,000 26 September 2023
Revolution Radio Limited £400 20 September 2023
Retrocadia Limited £400 16 June 2023
Bauer Radio £25,000 1 June 2023
Ahlebait TV Networks £10,000 25 April 2023

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20240627152557/https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/annual-reports-and-plans/other-financial-reporting

So fines are rare, they are also smaller for smaller organizations.

Example, this is their decision for Retrocardia:

QUOTE STARTS

Shoreline FM was a community radio service for Dymchurch and the surrounding areas of Romney Marsh, which was provided by Retrocadia Limited ("Retrocadia"). The station is now called Cinque Ports Radio.

Ofcom has imposed a £400 financial penalty on Retrocadia Limited after our investigation found that it had failed to comply with the conditions of its licence.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-standards/decision-retrocadia-limited/

QUOTE STARTS

Revolution Radio is a community radio service for the diverse ethnic communities of Northampton, which is provided by Revolution Radio Limited ("Revolution").

Ofcom has imposed a £400 financial penalty on Revolution Radio Limited after our investigation found that it had failed to comply with the conditions of its licence.

In our decision published on 10 October 2022 in issue 459 of Ofcom’s Broadcast and On Demand Bulletin, Ofcom found that Revolution had failed to serve its target community as set out in the character of service of its Key Commitments and was therefore in breach of Licence Conditions 2(1) and 2(4) of its licence. This was the second time that Revolution had been found in breach of these conditions of its licence.

This penalty would have been higher had Revolution not taken various additional steps to ensure compliance with its Key Commitments from mid-2022. In light of those additional steps, we do not currently have concerns that Revolution remains non-compliant.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-standards/decision-revolution-radio-limited/

And I don't think these cases would involve court cases. Just a letter from Offcom and then they pay the £400 fine.

I can't find a list of criminal cases but I expect they would be very rare indeed.

Also there is no way you'd just get a letter out of the blue saying you are summoned to a court for some offence you don't even know you committed.

They would talk to you over a long period of time before doing that.

It is very different from the subpostmaster thing.

So anyway I hope this helps you.

Or someone else if you want to transfer it to someone else in the UK say.

If this was a different situation and you were some close friend or relative say, or I was a long term member of the community you knew well, I'd be willing to take it on with no hesitation and no worries about risk at all.

It sounds as if it's not a huge time commitment for someone else. And you'd doubtless help them too, sounds like it would be more about them being the official figure in charge.

As you say we vary in our tolerance of risk. But my own risk tolerance level is also very low for different reasons.

If this was something I was doing and I was really keen to keep it going, I'd work through it some more, try out the tool, try to contact Ofcom, go through the assessment process which seems likely to be pretty simple for something like you.

I'd expect it to count as the lowest possible level of risk they have for something like what you do.

And I'd expect never to hear from them after submitting my assessment except form letters to say they received it and that it's okay.

But I would ask for help from Ofcom and other advice available to me to be sure :). I wouldn't rely on someone like me to advise me.

So, hope that helps. And if not that's fine and once again not trying to change your decision at all. Just hopefully helping with access to information you may not have encountered yet.

Thanks.

Sealand

Pirate Bay tried to buy that didn't they?

I had to google that.

I’m afraid you are going to end up hosting it in Russia if you want to escape direct legal action, but that’s not the route I’d advise personally.

Well I had hoped there'd be an option that wasn't Russia, China, North Korea, etc.

How about one of those flag of convenience type places, Liberia, British Virgin Islands, etc? Do they serve as digital freeports as well?

Haven’t read your whole post but isn’t looking at what fines they’ve issued thus far a bit like comparing apples and boomerangs, they haven’t fined anyone under the new osa yet because it isn’t in force yet?

^ this, and that they have gone after the little operators blows the argument that they'd only be interested in FB/Twitter etc apart.

& @RonAsheton useful to know it is simple & also the concern raised, ta.

To me, the contributions from @RobertInventor are quite helpful in demonstrating how regulators tend to operate, and are in line with my experience of regulators in other sectors.

Otoh, I don't think this view point changes the issue at hand.

Got to agree with you there, it can get brutal really fast just having a look around.