zlacker

>>buro9+(OP)
People seem to forget that the more legislation there is around something the more it is only feasible to do if you are a corporate person. Human persons just don't have the same rights or protections from liabilty.

>>superk+55
If you read the guidance:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/onli...

It amounts to your basic terms of service. It means that you'll need to moderate your forums, and prove that you have a policy for moderation. (basically what all decent forums do anyway) The crucial thing is that you need to record that you've done it, and reassessed it. and prove "you understand the 17 priority areas"

Its similar for what a trustee of a small charity is supposed to do each year for its due diligence.

>>Kaiser+bc
Yep super simple. You just have to make individual value judgements every day on thousands of pieces of content for SEVENTEEN highly specific priority areas. Then keep detailed records on each value judgement such that it can hold up to legal scrutiny from an activist court official. Easy peasy.

>>pembro+9i
No, not at all. You need to consider your service's risks against those seventeen categories once, and then review your assessment at least every year.

From the linked document above: "You need to keep a record of each illegal content risk assessment you carry out", "service providers may fully review their risk assessment (for example, as a matter of course every year)"

And links to a guidance document on reviewing the risk assessment[1] which says: "As a minimum, we consider that service providers should undertake a compliance review once a year".

[1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/onli...