If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A confrontation now unfolding between the UK’s communications regulator and a US-based website is ultimately less about the merits of certain online content than about jurisdiction. At stake is whether British authorities can fine and disrupt a company that operates entirely in the US and under US law for speech that is legal in the United States and protected by the First Amendment. On January 6, Ofcom disclosed that it had issued a “provisional notice of contravention” under the controversial Online Safety Act to an unnamed suicide discussion forum, suggesting a path toward financial penalties and court-ordered service blockades. More: UK Speech Regulator Ofcom Claims First Amendment Doesn’t Protect Americans From Its Censorship Law Attorney Preston Byrne has stated that the forum is wholly owned and operated from the United States and has already blocked UK users. The regulator framed its action as part of a compliance process under the UK’s censorship law, the Online Safety Act, citing alleged failures to respond to statutory information requests and to maintain required internal documentation related to illegal content risk assessments. Ofcom said it is preparing a formal decision in the first quarter of the year and warned that unresolved concerns could lead to penalties of up to £18 million or 10 percent of global revenue, whichever is higher. More significantly, Ofcom stated that it is prepared to ask courts to compel “third parties to withdraw services from, or block access to, a regulated service in the UK.” That would allow the regulator to pressure internet service providers, search engines, or other intermediaries into cutting off access to a site, even if the site itself has no UK presence and the UK has no jurisdiction. What makes the case unusual is that the platform has already implemented UK IP blocking. More: 4chan and Kiwi Farms Tell Ofcom It Can’t Censor and Run From Lawsuits The dispute is not about harm prevention but about whether UK regulators can enforce domestic speech rules against foreign speakers who are outside their legal reach. Byrne said that the site “will not entertain foreign censorship codes that violate rights secured by the Constitution.” In a separate post on X, Byrne described the case as politically driven, writing that “the entire UK censorship-industrial complex needs a ‘win’ for the Act so badly (having not had one in a year), they’ll manufacture one.” The Online Safety Act says that Ofcom has wide latitude to regulate user-to-user platforms, but Ofcom seems to think it has power beyond the UK border. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Pro-Censorship UK Regulator Pesters a US Forum Already Blocked in Britain appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The German government has discovered a clever way to expand its surveillance powers: call it “transparency.” The federal cabinet has approved a bill that would let state agents enter media offices and digital platforms without needing a judge’s permission. The official justification, ensuring honesty in political advertising, sounds harmless enough until you read the fine print and realize it’s about as transparent as a brick wall. The “Political Advertising Transparency Act” is described as an effort to align with new EU rules on political ad disclosure. What it actually does is grant the Bundesnetzagentur, a telecom regulator, search powers usually reserved for criminal investigators. More: Germany Turns Its Back on Decades‑Old Privacy Protections with Sweeping Surveillance Bill If the agency suspects a company has failed to file the right paperwork, it could send its people to “inspect” offices without a court order, provided they claim there’s an “imminent danger.” “Imminent danger” is one of those magic bureaucratic phrases that can mean anything from “credible bomb threat” to “somebody forgot to upload a PDF.” Once that phrase appears in law, the limits become a matter of interpretation. Legal experts have warned that the law tramples Germany’s Basic Law, which guarantees the inviolability of the home. For journalists, the stakes are higher. Confidential sources, ongoing investigations, and protected data could all be exposed to inspection because a regulator feels “concerned” about compliance. In plain language: this opens the door to state intrusion under the banner of good governance. The government insists the outrage is misplaced. Officials say this is just Germany meeting EU obligations and point to similar inspection powers in data protection and consumer regulation. By their logic, since regulators can already check how companies handle shopping data, they should also be able to walk into a newsroom. It’s all regulation, they argue. Journalism is not retail. And “protecting democracy” by granting bureaucrats unsupervised search powers is an interpretation that would have made earlier German lawmakers choke on their coffee. If this bill passes, regulators, not judges, will decide when it’s acceptable to cross a newsroom’s threshold. Germany’s postwar press protections were built on the principle that the state should never again decide what counts as acceptable reporting. This law erases that boundary. It may begin with political ads, but it ends with regulators deciding when democracy needs an “inspection.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Germany’s “Transparency Act” Lets Regulators Search Media Offices and Platforms Without Warrants appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Video platform Rumble has partnered with Tether to roll out a new cryptocurrency payment system that could transform how creators earn money online. The feature, called Rumble Wallet, lets users store, send, and receive digital currencies directly through the platform without depending on banks or third-party processors, removing censorship opportunities. With this integration, Rumble aims to simplify payments between creators and their audiences while avoiding high transaction fees and restrictions often imposed by financial institutions. The company said the new tool supports its broader goal of promoting both financial independence and freedom of expression online. Rumble founder and CEO Chris Pavlovski highlighted that mission, stating, “Rumble represents free speech and liberty the same way that cryptocurrency and a decentralized internet represent freedom, and Rumble Wallet is the natural combination of those things.” He added, “We are putting more power into the hands of users and creators so they can engage with and financially support the content they like.” Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino said the initiative aligns with Tether’s ongoing efforts to promote decentralization and user autonomy. He described the wallet as a product that could give tens of millions of people more control than most existing online platforms provide. To support the wallet’s operations, MoonPay will handle the conversion between cryptocurrencies and traditional payment options such as credit cards, Apple Pay, PayPal, and Venmo. Ivan Soto-Wright, CEO of MoonPay, said, “Peer-to-peer payments powered by crypto are the future of the internet economy.” He continued, “Rumble is one of the first major platforms to adopt this model, giving creators the ability to get paid instantly in stablecoins or Bitcoin and easily move in and out of fiat.” The launch of Rumble Wallet represents a step toward integrating digital finance with open online expression, reflecting the company’s vision of a more independent and decentralized internet economy. The launch comes at a time when creators have increasingly faced removals, payment freezes, and sudden account closures across major tech and financial platforms. By building crypto payments directly into its service, Rumble is positioning the wallet as a way to reduce reliance on systems that can cut off access to income with little notice. For creators who worry about deplatforming or losing monetization overnight, the company is presenting Rumble Wallet as a tool meant to keep financial support flowing directly between audiences and the people they follow. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Rumble and Tether Launch “Rumble Wallet” to Enable Direct Crypto Payments for Creators appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Customers entering Wegmans stores in New York City are now being monitored in new ways. The grocery chain has started collecting biometric information such as facial, eye, and voice data from anyone who walks into its Manhattan and Brooklyn locations, according to recently posted signs. The notices explain that the data collection is meant to “protect the safety and security of our patrons and employees.” This marks a notable expansion of a 2024 pilot program that Wegmans had described as small and temporary. At that time, the company stated that biometric scanning applied only to a limited number of employees and that any information gathered from shoppers would be deleted. The new notices make no mention of deletion or data limits. Wegmans did not respond to questions about how it stores the information, how long it keeps it, or whether it shares it with outside parties, Gothamist reported. Efforts to regulate the use of biometric tracking by private businesses in New York have stalled. A 2023 City Council proposal sought to restrict such technologies after Madison Square Garden used facial recognition to identify and remove attorneys connected to lawsuits against the company. The bill has since gone nowhere, and Councilmember Shahana Hanif, who introduced it, did not comment on Wegmans’ expanded use of the system. A city rule passed in 2021 only requires businesses to display a sign when they collect biometric identifiers. The Department of Consumer and Worker Protection has said that it cannot penalize companies that fail to comply, leaving individuals to pursue their own legal action. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Wegmans Expands Biometric Surveillance in NYC Stores, Collecting Facial, Eye, and Voice Data from Shoppers appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Become a Member and Keep Reading… Reclaim your digital freedom. Get the latest on censorship, cancel culture, and surveillance, and learn how to fight back. Join Already a supporter? Sign In. (If you’re already logged in but still seeing this, refresh this page to show the post.) The post France’s First Lady and the Fragile State of Free Speech appeared first on Reclaim The Net.