4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States
4chan's lawyer says Ofcom cannot collect its fines through U.S. courts. Ofcom defends its UK safety powers. The U.S. immunity ruling dismissed 4chan's suit while discussing possible defenses to a future enforcement attempt.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The case examines Ofcom's pursuit of fines against 4chan and its ability to enforce them in the United States. The application of UK safety duties and collection in a foreign court are distinct questions.
Ofcom's March statement (opens in a new tab) describes age-check and illegal-content penalties. It says its requirements protect UK users, rather than requiring restrictions on what users abroad can see.
Judge Rudolph Contreras's September 15 opinion (opens in a new tab) grants Ofcom sovereign immunity and dismisses the suit. It notes potential constitutional and foreign-penalty defenses if Ofcom later seeks U.S. enforcement. Those conditional observations do not decide that future question.
Byrne's October 20 article (opens in a new tab) treats Dawes's comments as an admission. LBC's account (opens in a new tab) also records her commitment to pursue enforcement as far as possible.
Timeline
2 timeline entries on this page. Dates: September 15, 2026 to October 20, 2026
September 2026
U.S. court dismisses the challenge on sovereign-immunity grounds
Judge Rudolph Contreras grants Ofcom's motion to dismiss. His opinion discusses potential defenses to a future enforcement action without deciding such an action.
[01]4chan v. Ofcom: dismissal for lack of jurisdiction
The court grants Ofcom sovereign immunity. Its discussion of potential defenses to future enforcement is conditional and does not decide a collection proceeding.
4chan v. Ofcom: dismissal for lack of jurisdictionCivil Action 25-2880, Document 15, pages 1 and 21-24
October 2026
Dawes addresses limits on recovering overseas fines
LBC reports Dawes's warning that foreign courts could prevent collection. It also records her commitment to pursue enforcement as far as possible and her emphasis on compliance.
[02]Ofcom chief discusses unpaid online-safety fines before MPs
Contemporaneous reporting includes both Dawes's collection warning and her statement that Ofcom will pursue enforcement as far as possible.
Ofcom chief discusses unpaid online-safety fines before MPsDawes's remarks about foreign courts, collection and continued enforcement
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
3 responses. Newest first.
Preston ByrneLawyer representing 4chanDirectly involved Before this statement
Byrne discusses Dawes's comments about recovery through foreign courts and quotes the U.S. court's enforcement discussion.
"Ofcom can’t enforce the Online Safety Act in America."
DeniedCase context: 4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States
Full statement and sources
Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce the Online Safety Act in America.
After the statement
He acknowledges possible UK blocking and advocates U.S. shield legislation.
Ofcom Concedes Defeat in the 4chan Case · Preston ByrneByrne's interpretation of Dawes's testimony and the September immunity ruling4chan v. Ofcom: dismissal for lack of jurisdictionCivil Action 25-2880, Document 15, pages 1 and 21-24Why this label?
Relative to Ofcom's asserted ability to enforce its action against 4chan in the United States, Byrne explicitly denies enforceability. He does not describe a merits judgment already granting 4chan relief.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
OfcomOfcom chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes, giving evidence to the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport CommitteeDirectly involved Before this statement
Asked which penalties are outstanding and what Ofcom is doing to collect them, Dawes says 11 fines have been issued and nine are unpaid, and cites Ofcom's recovery of a fine from Star China Media.
"We won't be able to recover every single fine on online safety. 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. But we will always seek to go as far as we can."
Mixed or conditionalCase context: 4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States
Full statement and sources
Dawes tells MPs that Ofcom will not be able to recover every online safety fine, that there will be a point at which it must accept losing that money if foreign courts get in its way, and that it will still go as far as it can.
After the statement
She then says the fined companies have done what Ofcom wanted to protect the public.
Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee evidence session on the work of OfcomAbout 1:01:40 to 1:04:55 into the recording (Dame Melanie Dawes on circumvention and unpaid online safety fines)Why this label?
Relative to Ofcom's ability to collect its fines from overseas services such as 4chan, Dawes concedes that foreign courts could stop recovery while saying Ofcom will pursue fines as far as it can. Her position depends on what foreign courts do.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
OfcomUK communications and online-safety regulatorDirectly involved Before this statement
Ofcom's statement announces fines against 4chan.
"As in other industries, companies that provide an online service to people in the UK must comply with UK laws."
Defended or excusedCase context: 4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States
Full statement and sources
Ofcom argues that services reaching UK users must follow UK safety requirements.
After the statement
It says the Act protects UK users and does not require restrictions on what people in other countries can see.
Ofcom explains its March 2026 fines against 4chan · OfcomAge-check findings, territorial scope and payment-of-fines sectionsWhy this label?
Relative to Ofcom's pursuit of penalties against 4chan, the regulator defends the territorial basis for applying its safety duties. This does not establish how a U.S. court would treat collection.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(5)
Analysis
Ofcom Concedes Defeat in the 4chan Case
Relevant passage: Byrne's interpretation of Dawes's testimony and the September immunity ruling
About this source
4chan's lawyer argues that U.S. courts would prevent collection. The headline and conclusion are his interpretation, not a judicial declaration of victory.
- Author
- Preston Byrne
- Published
- Accessed
Original video
Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee evidence session on the work of Ofcom
Relevant passage: About 1:01:40 to 1:04:55 into the recording (Dame Melanie Dawes on circumvention and unpaid online safety fines)
About this source
Official Parliament recording of the October 20, 2026 evidence session at which Ofcom chief executive Dame Melanie Dawes and chair Sir Ian Cheshire answered questions from the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee.
- Author
- UK Parliament
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Ofcom explains its March 2026 fines against 4chan
Relevant passage: Age-check findings, territorial scope and payment-of-fines sections
About this source
Ofcom defends applying UK safety duties to services used in the UK and describes court recovery and business-disruption options. It distinguishes UK users from users abroad.
- Author
- Ofcom
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Ofcom chief discusses unpaid online-safety fines before MPs
Relevant passage: Dawes's remarks about foreign courts, collection and continued enforcement
About this source
Contemporaneous reporting includes both Dawes's collection warning and her statement that Ofcom will pursue enforcement as far as possible.
- Author
- Helen Hoddinott and Alice Padgett
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
4chan v. Ofcom: dismissal for lack of jurisdiction
Relevant passage: Civil Action 25-2880, Document 15, pages 1 and 21-24
About this source
The court grants Ofcom sovereign immunity. Its discussion of potential defenses to future enforcement is conditional and does not decide a collection proceeding.
- Author
- Rudolph Contreras
- Published
- Accessed
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- 4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/4chan-ofcom-fines-us-enforcement-preston-byrne
The Dispute Index. "4chan lawyer Preston Byrne says Ofcom cannot enforce its fines in the United States". First published: 2026-10-21. Last updated: 2026-10-21. https://disputeindex.com/cases/4chan-ofcom-fines-us-enforcement-preston-byrne