Britain's reputation as an  Internet-friendly creative hub was in jeopardy today as websites  voiced their anger at draconian attempts to regulate online  commentary and news.
    Some website founders told The Independent that they    were considering moving their businesses overseas in order to    escape the risk of crippling legal costs resulting from their    inclusion within press reforms introduced on Monday in a Royal    Charter.  
    The warnings came as several established media organisations    signalled that they would not be signing up to the new    regulatory system.  
    The Spectator magazine produced a front page with the    single word No. Ian Hislop, editor of Private Eye,    said he saw no reason to join. At the moment I'm out, he    said.  
    Four of Britain's largest newspaper groups, including the    publishers of The Telegraph, The Daily Mail    and The Sun, were tonight taking high level legal    advice amid speculation that they might set up a breakaway    press regulatory system. In an email to readers, Daily    Telegraph deputy editor Benedict Brogan expressed the    personal view that we should note the outcome, thank the    politicians for their engagement, and quietly but firmly    decline to take part.  
    But the question of internet regulation could prove even    thornier. The influential Association of Online Publishers    (AOP) tonight issued a statement to say it had major concerns    about the charter, particularly over the threat of punitive    awards in the libel courts for those who do not join the    regulatory system. The organisation's chairman John Barnes    said: There are major concerns about Exemplary Damages and    arbitration and AOP is concerned that the new system will just    not work.  
    The charter will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on    everyday people's web use, the freedom of speech group Index    on Censorship said. Bloggers could find themselves subject to    exemplary damages in court, due to the fact that they were not    part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first    place. This mess of legislation has been thrown together with    alarming haste: there's little doubt we'll repent for a while    to come.  
    Camilla Wright, who founded the entertainment website Popbitch,    said she would be prepared to move the site to America to avoid    being subject to a regulator which will have power over    websites which produce gossip about celebrities, other public    figures or other persons in the news.  
    She said: It will put some people out of business I would have    thought. It would be a massive step to turn Popbitch    into a North American publication and get First Amendment    protection but it would not be out of the question. I would not    want to move out of the UK but it would be a sad day to stop    publishing because of a law brought in to help rein in the    excesses of some newspapers.  
    Jamie East, founder of another entertainment site Holy Moly,    said he was confused by the proposals and why Twitter is    seemingly exempt from regulation. Making Twitter exempt is    weird because the majority of stories on celebrity blogs are    derived from Twitter anyway - you could argue it is more of a    news feed than a social network.  
Excerpt from:
Press 'deal' offers more questions than answers