The UK’s communications regulator Ofcom has issued its first fine under the Online Safety Act, penalizing the notorious imageboard 4chan £20,000 ($26,680) for failing to comply with child safety requirements and ignoring multiple requests for information[1].
The penalty marks a significant escalation in the UK’s efforts to enforce its sweeping internet safety legislation, which came into force on March 17, 2025. However, 4chan has declared it will refuse to pay, setting up a potentially precedent-setting clash over jurisdictional authority and cross-border internet regulation[2].
The Charges Against 4chan
Ofcom opened its investigation into 4chan on June 10, 2025, after the platform failed to respond to an April 14 request for copies of its illegal content risk assessments and information about its qualifying worldwide revenue[1]. The regulator is examining whether 4chan has violated its duties under the Online Safety Act to protect children from harmful content.
The initial £20,000 fine could escalate dramatically, with Ofcom warning that additional penalties of £100 per day could accumulate for up to 60 days if 4chan continues its non-compliance[1]. Under the Act’s full enforcement powers, maximum penalties can reach £18 million or 10 percent of an organization’s global revenue, whichever is greater[1].
Tech Secretary Liz Kendall emphasized the government’s commitment to enforcement, stating: “The Online Safety Act is not just law, it’s a lifeline. This fine is a clear warning to those who fail to remove illegal content or protect children from harmful material”[1].
4chan’s Defiant Response
Rather than comply, 4chan has mounted an aggressive legal and political counteroffensive. The platform’s legal team, led by attorney Preston Byrne, argues that Ofcom has no jurisdiction over the U.S.-based company, calling the investigation an “illegal campaign of harassment” against American tech firms[2].
In a strongly worded statement, 4chan’s lawyers declared: “American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an e-mail”[2]. The platform maintains that as a Delaware-incorporated entity with no UK operations, it cannot be compelled to follow UK law.
4chan has also appealed directly to the Trump administration, urging the U.S. government to “invoke all diplomatic and legal levers” to protect American companies from what it characterizes as extraterritorial censorship demands[2].
U.S. Regulatory Support
4chan’s position found unexpected support from the Federal Trade Commission. FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson sent letters to major technology companies including Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and Apple, warning that complying with foreign censorship requirements could violate U.S. law[2]. The letters specifically cited the UK’s Online Safety Act and the EU’s Digital Services Act as examples of foreign statutes that could force American firms to restrict Americans’ speech and security protections.
Broader Enforcement Campaign
The 4chan case is part of a wider enforcement sweep by Ofcom. Since March 2025, the regulator has opened 21 investigations into in-scope apps and websites and launched five enforcement programs[1]. The agency has also issued provisional decisions to take action against file-sharing service Im.ge and pornography provider AVS Group Ltd for similar failures to respond to information requests[1].
Some platforms have chosen cooperation over confrontation. After Ofcom identified “serious compliance concerns” with file-sharing services 1Fichier.com and Gofile.io, both implemented hash-matching technology for detecting child sexual abuse material and avoided further enforcement action[1].
Hash-matching technology, which Ofcom is requiring platforms to deploy, creates digital fingerprints of images and compares them against databases of known illegal content, allowing for automated detection and removal[1].
Enforcement Challenges
Despite Ofcom’s aggressive stance, enforcing penalties against offshore providers remains uncertain. Legal experts note that while Ofcom cannot directly compel a U.S. company to pay fines, it could seek court orders to pressure third parties such as search engines, payment providers, or internet service providers to restrict 4chan’s UK presence[2].
The jurisdictional dispute extends beyond 4chan. The Wikimedia Foundation is challenging provisions of the UK law that could require identity verification for Wikipedia contributors, citing risks including data breaches and retaliation by authoritarian governments[2].
Suzanne Cater, director of enforcement at Ofcom, remained firm on the regulator’s position: “Today sends a clear message that any service which flagrantly fails to engage with Ofcom and their duties under the Online Safety Act can expect to face robust enforcement action”[1].
The standoff between 4chan and Ofcom represents a critical test case for how internet regulation will function in an era of conflicting national laws, where platforms based in one jurisdiction serve users in another. The outcome could set important precedents for global internet governance and the limits of national regulatory authority.
Sources
[1] The Register - Ofcom fines 4chan £20K and counting for pretending UK’s Online Safety Act doesn’t exist
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/13/4chan_ofcom_fine/
[2] Legal.io - 4chan Rejects UK Online Safety Act Fines, Turns to Trump Administration for Support
https://www.legal.io/articles/5719327/4chan-Rejects-UK-Online-Safety-Act-Fines-Turns-to-Trump-Administration-for-Support
[3] Telecoms.com - Ofcom fines 4chan for Online Safety Act breach
https://www.telecoms.com/regulation/ofcom-fines-4chan-for-online-safety-act-breach