[DanBC]

ISPs in the UK have to obey court orders, and there are some court orders in place for the "big 5" ISPs around certain piracy websites.

If I try to go to thepiratebay.org I get this

--- Access to this website has been blocked under an Order of the Higher Court.

Any TalkTalk customer affected by the Court Order has a right under the Court Order to apply to vary or discharge it. Any such application must: (i) clearly indicate the identity and status of the applicant; (ii) be supported by evidence setting out and justifying the grounds of the application; and (iii) be made on 10 days notice to all of the parties to the Court Order.

For further details click here. ---

On top of that there is a voluntary scheme run by the Internet Watch Foundation to provide filtering for sites that share images of child sexual abuse. Some ISPs don't participate in this, but the vast majority do. One famous example of things that get blocked (but also reasonably quickly unblocked) are the Wikipedia page for a band. NSFW link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Watch_Foundation_and_...

[lmm]

I believe it's illegal not to apply the Internet Watch Foundation blacklist (despite the IWF being completely unaccountable). A&A does a scheme where they'll set you up as a 1-person ISP and provide an unfiltered feed, but you have to sign something saying you're applying the blacklist yourself.

[Nextgrid]

In the UK? Do you know the relevant law and could provide a link?

I briefly looked at the legal side of offering public Wi-Fi (essentially becoming an ISP) and besides debunking a ton of BS (turns out you don’t need to collect traffic data unless explicitly ordered by the government, and sign-in pages/captive portals/ToS aren’t necessary either) I never even heard of the IWF.

Curious how this law would apply to the ISPs providing connectivity to dedicated servers.