OT: possible end of this group?

[Tweed]

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/

I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?

Thoughts?

Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

[Tweed]

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Further write up here

https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/14/online_safety_act/?td=rt-4a

[JNugent]

Post by Tweed

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Further write up here
https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/14/online_safety_act/?td=rt-4a

QUOTE:
If the service has a significant number of UK users, if the United
Kingdom is a target market, or the site is capable of being accessed by
British and Northern Irish users and there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.
ENDQUOTE

TRIMMED VERSION:
If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.

PARAPHRASED VERSION:

If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is [NO] material risk
of significant harm to such users, then the law does not apply.

[My emphases.]

What harm could realistically be expected from reading messages in a
group devoted to railways and connected matters?

[Tweed]

Post by JNugent

Post by Tweed

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Further write up here
https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/14/online_safety_act/?td=rt-4a

If the service has a significant number of UK users, if the United
Kingdom is a target market, or the site is capable of being accessed by
British and Northern Irish users and there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.
ENDQUOTE
If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.
If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is [NO] material risk
of significant harm to such users, then the law does not apply.
[My emphases.]
What harm could realistically be expected from reading messages in a
group devoted to railways and connected matters?

The point is that the servers carry all of usenet, not just railway stuff.
In the context of our laws applying to overseas operators, lots of US sites
decided to geoblock UK and European users over their fears of GDPR. Whether
these fears were grounded in fact is irrelevant. They did it anyway and
continue to do so. My fear is overseas usenet server operators will decide
the UK is too difficult to bother with.

[Bevan Price]

Post by Tweed

Post by JNugent

Post by Tweed

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Further write up here
https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/14/online_safety_act/?td=rt-4a

If the service has a significant number of UK users, if the United
Kingdom is a target market, or the site is capable of being accessed by
British and Northern Irish users and there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.
ENDQUOTE
If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is a material risk of
significant harm to such users, then the law applies.
If... [British and Northern Irish users] AND there is [NO] material risk
of significant harm to such users, then the law does not apply.
[My emphases.]
What harm could realistically be expected from reading messages in a
group devoted to railways and connected matters?

The point is that the servers carry all of usenet, not just railway stuff.
In the context of our laws applying to overseas operators, lots of US sites
decided to geoblock UK and European users over their fears of GDPR. Whether
these fears were grounded in fact is irrelevant. They did it anyway and
continue to do so. My fear is overseas usenet server operators will decide
the UK is too difficult to bother with.

In the event that this newsgroup becomes closed or inaccessible in UK,
members may find this alternative interesting:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/

It holds similar discussions, but it is moderated. The main differences
to here include:

It is split into sections covering different aspects of rail operations
& history; there are also sections for more general types of discussion.
Some threads can be a bit more "technical" than are found here, but you
can choose those you wish to pursue.

But note that, whilst moderation is generally "light":

Wandering off topic is actively discouraged. OT posts may be deleted, or
transferred to a new thread.

Whilst there are some very long threads, any where discussion has become
too repetitive / stale may be "blocked" to any additional posts.

Bad language & personal insults are unwelcome.

Membership is free. Personally, I find enough interest to visit both
here and RailUK forums.

[Mark Goodge]

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Rather than discuss it here, where it's well and truly off topic, I'd
suggest adding uk.legal.moderated to your subscribed groups where there's
already an active thread on the topic and where some of the people involved
in the discussion have relevant knowledge and expertise.

Mark

[Tweed]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Rather than discuss it here, where it's well and truly off topic, I'd
suggest adding uk.legal.moderated to your subscribed groups where there's
already an active thread on the topic and where some of the people involved
in the discussion have relevant knowledge and expertise.
Mark

I was more interested in the possible practical effects on this group.

[Mark Goodge]

Post by Tweed

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I?m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

Rather than discuss it here, where it's well and truly off topic, I'd
suggest adding uk.legal.moderated to your subscribed groups where there's
already an active thread on the topic and where some of the people involved
in the discussion have relevant knowledge and expertise.

I was more interested in the possible practical effects on this group.

The TL;DR summary is that for ordinary users there are unlikely to be any
practical effects at all. None of us have any responsibility for the
servers, and the server operators are unlikely to have significant
difficulty complying with the legislation.

Mark

[Coffee]

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

I moderate a groups.io group. There are some members best described as
maverick and I've made the decision I will have to resign as a moderator
and the legal risks are too great.

[M***@DastardlyHQ.org]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:23:00 +0000

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-se
rvices/

I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

I moderate a groups.io group. There are some members best described as
maverick and I've made the decision I will have to resign as a moderator
and the legal risks are too great.

UK law extends as far as UK borders. If usenet servers are based overseas
they have no obligation to follow this nonsense. They could geo block UK IP
addresses or simply do nothing and if the ISP blocks them then it achieves
the same effect, if they don't then business as usual.

I have a suspicion that so few people even in IT never mind the general public
know about usenet that it'll fly under the radar anyway.

[Theo]

Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:23:00 +0000

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-se
rvices/

Iâ??m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

I moderate a groups.io group. There are some members best described as
maverick and I've made the decision I will have to resign as a moderator
and the legal risks are too great.

UK law extends as far as UK borders. If usenet servers are based overseas
they have no obligation to follow this nonsense. They could geo block UK IP
addresses or simply do nothing and if the ISP blocks them then it achieves
the same effect, if they don't then business as usual.
I have a suspicion that so few people even in IT never mind the general public
know about usenet that it'll fly under the radar anyway.

Even if a Usenet server was blocked, it wouldn't be too hard to set up your
own personal server that receives articles from abroad. Then you're your
own administrator and you can set the policy to suit you. If this becomes a
big deal, expect automation of this to spring up.

Usenet is very censorship resistant (in some ways that's one of its flaws -
it's very hard to control spam or bad behaviour) which also means it's hard to
block.

Theo

[Mark Goodge]

On 17 Jan 2025 18:15:04 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo
Even if a Usenet server was blocked, it wouldn't be too hard to set up your
own personal server that receives articles from abroad. Then you're your
own administrator and you can set the policy to suit you. If this becomes a
big deal, expect automation of this to spring up.

The main problem with that is that even if you're there, there may not be
enough other people there to sustain ongoing discussions. All social media
requires a critical mass of users to have value.

Post by Theo
Usenet is very censorship resistant (in some ways that's one of its flaws -
it's very hard to control spam or bad behaviour) which also means it's hard to
block.

Once upon a time, maybe. But the dwindling number of Usenet providers means
that it's now much easier to control.

Mark

[Clive Page]

Post by Theo
Even if a Usenet server was blocked, it wouldn't be too hard to set up your
own personal server that receives articles from abroad. Then you're your
own administrator and you can set the policy to suit you. If this becomes a
big deal, expect automation of this to spring up.
Usenet is very censorship resistant (in some ways that's one of its flaws -
it's very hard to control spam or bad behaviour) which also means it's hard to
block.

I can (just) remember a time before the Internet (and well before the Web) when we got Usenet via UUCP - Unix to Unix Copy Program. Perhaps Usenet should return to its roots?

[Allan]

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/
guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

I moderate a groups.io group.  There are some members best described as
maverick and I've made the decision I will have to resign as a moderator
and the legal risks are too great.

Thank you for the nudge. I too am a (joint) moderator of a groups.io
list (which happens to be for the Settle-Carlisle line. but it would be
similar for any groups.io group, I think), and I hadn't really thought
about it much, but having to think about it now.

[Tweed]

Post by Allan

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/
guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server
providers within scope. Even if they are based overseas. I can see those
providers deciding this is too complicated and simply geo blocking UK IP
addresses. Yes, I know VPNs can bypass this, but will the majority of
correspondents here bother?
Thoughts?
Please - no diversions down the route as to whether or not the legislation
is a good idea or not. It exists and we have to consider the possible
fallout.

I moderate a groups.io group.  There are some members best described as
maverick and I've made the decision I will have to resign as a moderator
and the legal risks are too great.

Thank you for the nudge. I too am a (joint) moderator of a groups.io
list (which happens to be for the Settle-Carlisle line. but it would be
similar for any groups.io group, I think), and I hadn't really thought
about it much, but having to think about it now.

Don’t the responsibilities lie with the owner of groups.io not anyone who
is a moderator?

[Mark Goodge]

Post by Allan
Thank you for the nudge. I too am a (joint) moderator of a groups.io
list (which happens to be for the Settle-Carlisle line. but it would be
similar for any groups.io group, I think), and I hadn't really thought
about it much, but having to think about it now.

Don’t the responsibilities lie with the owner of groups.io not anyone who
is a moderator?

As far as the Online Safety Act is concerned, yes, liability rests with the
service provider, not moderators of individual fora that it hosts.

Moderators can be liable for civil actions (eg, defamation, copyright
infringement). But that's always been the case, and isn't affected by the
legislation. The legislation doesn't create new criminal liabilities for
moderators, only for service providers.

Mark

[JMB99]

Post by Tweed
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/guide-for-services/
I’m no expert, but a casual reading of this would bring Usenet server

I know there are some odd people amongst train spotters but I can't
imagine even Two Tiers himself getting worried about this newsgroup,

There was a proposal a couple of weeks ago to drop
rec.radio.broadcasting but that was because of lack of activity there.