zlacker

>>ColinW+(OP)
Charlie Stross's blog is next.

Liability is unlimited and there's no provision in law for being a single person or small group of volunteers. You'll be held to the same standards as a behemoth with full time lawyers (the stated target of the law but the least likely to be affected by it)

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2024/12/storm-cl...

The entire law is weaponised unintented consequences.

>>amiga3+wc
This is an honest question. Why does a blog need to shutdown? If they moderate every comment before it is published on the website, what's the problem? I ask because I've got a UK-based blog too. It has got comments feature. Wouldn't enabling moderation for all comments be enough?

>>eminen+Jj
No, you still need to do things like write an impact assessment etc and you're still on the hook for "illegal" comments where you aren't a judge and have to arbitrarily decide what might be when you have no legal expertise whatsoever.

>>Mindwi+gm
If I'm moderating all comments before they're published on the website, what's the problem? I mean, I've got a simple tech blog. I'm not going to publish random drive-by comments. Only comments that relate to my blog are ever going to be published. Am I making sense?

>>eminen+8q
Does anyone in your blog comments ever discuss circumvention of DRM?

That's a criminal offence in the UK (two year prison sentence in some circumstances). Do you have a good feeling for what might count as incitement in those circumstances?

>>Mindwi+ys
> Does anyone in your blog comments ever discuss circumvention of DRM?

No, they don't. My blog is not all that popular. It has got some programming puzzles, Linux HOW-TOs and stuff. Most of my audience is just my friends.

>>eminen+Ox
The point is, whether you think the comments are safe is irrelevant because you are not the judge.

Of course that is the cynical version of it. But as others have pointed out some people dont like these sort of risk.