Ofcom has effectively conceded defeat in its enforcement action against 4chan, according to testimony before the UK Commons Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport Committee. During the hearing, Ofcom’s Chief Executive Dame Melanie Dawes stated: “If foreign courts decide to… try and get in our way, there will be a point at which we have to accept that we won’t be able to recover that money.”
The acknowledgment follows a federal court ruling in the case 4chan v. Ofcom, filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia over a year ago. The American court issued preliminary guidance suggesting that Ofcom would face significant obstacles enforcing its judgments in US courts.
According to the court’s opinion, American courts generally decline to enforce foreign judgments that conflict with the US Constitution, particularly those that implicate First Amendment protections. The court specifically noted that 4chan, which the plaintiff states has “no presence, infrastructure, or operations abroad,” could seek protection in American courts if Ofcom attempted enforcement there.
The ruling also indicated that American courts may refuse to enforce foreign penal judgments regardless of their constitutional compatibility. The court’s language was characterized as a clear signal to Ofcom that its enforcement powers do not extend into US jurisdiction.
Ofcom had issued enforcement action against 4chan under the UK’s Online Safety Act. According to the source, Ofcom has targeted approximately 200 American platforms with censorship orders, but only four sites—all represented by the same legal team—have refused compliance, with 4chan being the only platform to fully resist.
The source indicates that Ofcom may seek new powers from Parliament, including “interim business disruption measures” that would allow blocking foreign websites in the UK before formal enforcement proceedings. However, these powers were previously rejected by Parliament and have been repudiated by former MP Nadine Dorries, who introduced the original legislation.
The outcome reflects broader tensions between UK regulatory authority and American constitutional protections, particularly regarding free speech rights in cross-border digital regulation.
Key facts
- Ofcom’s Chief Executive admitted in parliamentary testimony that the regulator cannot recover fines if foreign courts block enforcement
- A US federal court in 4chan v. Ofcom issued preliminary guidance indicating American courts would likely protect 4chan from UK enforcement under First Amendment grounds
- American courts generally refuse to enforce foreign judgments that violate the US Constitution
- Ofcom has issued enforcement orders against approximately 200 American platforms, but only four have refused compliance
- The court suggested American courts may decline to enforce foreign penal judgments even independent of constitutional concerns