4chan and Kiwi Farms Tell Ofcom It Can’t Censor and Run From Lawsuits

The filing says Ofcom’s notices to 4chan and Kiwi Farms are a breach of US sovereignty disguised as online safety.

CINDY HARPER

Attorneys representing 4chan and Kiwi Farms have filed an opposition to the UK Office of Communications’ (Ofcom) motion to dismiss their US lawsuit, arguing that the British regulator’s attempt to enforce its Online Safety Act (OSA) on American platforms amounts to unlawful foreign censorship and overreach into the United States’ constitutional domain.

The filing, made in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on December 29, 2025, contends that Ofcom’s actions, sending legally binding “Section 100 Orders” via email to compel compliance with the OSA, violate US sovereignty and the First Amendment.

We obtained a copy of the filing for you here.

The plaintiffs assert that Ofcom’s conduct has no legal force in the United States because it bypassed all recognized international service procedures, including the Hague Service Convention and the US–UK Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty.

Lawyers Ron Coleman and Preston Byrne argue that Ofcom’s regulatory model functions like a commercial enterprise rather than a sovereign body, funded through fees extracted from companies it regulates.

Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, the plaintiffs maintain that this structure places Ofcom’s operations within the “commercial activity” exception, thereby stripping it of immunity from suit in US courts.

The opposition brief situates the dispute within a broader geopolitical context, describing a “diplomatic standoff” between Washington and London over the reach of online speech laws.

It cites US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers, who called Ofcom’s actions “censorship of Americans in America” and a “red line” for the US government.

At issue is whether the United Kingdom can compel US-based websites to remove or monitor speech that remains lawful under American law.

Ofcom’s notices to 4chan and Kiwi Farms included threats of multimillion-pound fines and criminal penalties for refusing to conduct “illegal content risk assessments” and implement age-verification systems.

Both companies argue that complying would require violating the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

The plaintiffs also accuse Ofcom of targeting smaller American platforms to “make public examples” of them as part of an international campaign to export European-style speech regulation.

The filing ties Ofcom’s activities to what it calls the “censorship-industrial complex,” a network of government agencies and private advocacy groups collaborating to standardize digital content controls.

In essence, the opposition asks the DC court to confirm that the United Kingdom cannot impose or serve censorship orders on US soil, nor conscript Americans into enforcing foreign speech laws.

---

This article (4chan and Kiwi Farms Tell Ofcom It Can’t Censor and Run From Lawsuits) was created and published by Reclaim the Net and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Cindy Harper

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.