3 ms·

Well, you have to obeye local law. Only because the internet makes it easy to provide services in other countries doesn't put you outside their law - the territ

Well, you have to obeye local law. Only because the internet makes it easy to provide services in other countries doesn't put you outside their law - the territorial principle applies. Regarding the data protection specifics, well, maybe it makes sense to follow the standards of the most rigid country globally? The wild west manner of US-companies and government are really annoying, the mindset is - if I get my hand on the data it's my property. That is wrong, the user trusts "you" with it's data and expects it's usage only in the beforehand given consent for the necessary purposes. It's like copyright, the company has certain usage rights but does not own it. The principles are easy: data processing has to be purposeful, lawful, fair and user rights and will is to be respected.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago
> Regarding the data protection specifics, well, maybe it makes sense to follow the standards of the most rigid country globally? Have you really considered the implications of that precedent? Blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia. Censorship law in China. Never mind what happens when the laws in two different countries conflict, e.g. privacy vs. data retention.
- alistairSH 11y ago
  "Brick and mortar" companies deal with this stuff. Why should the tech industry be exempt? If there is profit to be had, the tech giants will figure it out. If there is no profit, then those countries with laws that are on the fringe will have to make do without, or change their laws to be more mainstream. edit - I'm not implying that this is easy. Or, can't be made easier. Only that laws have varied by country for eons and merchants have always found a way to deal.
  - jernfrost 11y ago
    But this is already a problem, that hasn't been solved. Facebook e.g. follows essentially American moral standards when censoring. That really crashes with e.g. far more liberal views northern Europe. People post what are regular pictures and accepted social norms in say Scandinavia but which gets removed or accounts closed down or what not because of the far more pious American morality. This is already part of a national debate going on whether we should allow America to define our moral codes and values. If we throw in muslims world which are hundreds of millions of people, then this stuff is going to turn into a big mess. Since I don't live in the middle east, maybe it already is a mess.
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    > "Brick and mortar" companies deal with this stuff. Why should the tech industry be exempt? "Brick and mortar" companies decide where to lay their bricks. You put a website on the internet and it's on the whole internet. In practice you can't even restrict who can access it, as Netflix can attest. Suppose I don't agree with the laws in X country, or they conflict with the law in the country I'm physically in. Is it really going to satisfy anybody if I put "may not access this service from X country" in the terms of service somewhere, implement some fig leaf of a system to prevent access from there that everyone and their mother can bypass in five seconds (or the bypass ends up built into web browsers), and then millions of people from that country access it anyway? How does that help anybody vs. just letting the service operate under the laws of the country where it physically exists and letting the users decide if they want to patronize a service that operates under that jurisdiction's laws? (Unless the goal is to increase the adoption of Tor and other anti-censorship software?)
sbov 11y ago
There is a huge difference. On the internet, by default, you are international. Brick and mortar stores, by default, are only local. We have a website that sells stuff. It is "not available" in Europe. We do not ship to Europe. We block email addresses with European domains and let them know we're not available. We attempt to block Europe ip addresses by geolocating and let them know we're not available in Europe. Yet people from Europe still slip in. We go through several steps to let them know we cannot handle their business, but they still get through. Are we liable? Speaking generally, laws do not necessarily care about any mitigations we take. We could still be fined millions of dollars (more than our revenue) in certain countries despite doing our best to block them. Sorry, but it's completely ridiculous.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago

> Regarding the data protection specifics, well, maybe it makes sense to follow the standards of the most rigid country globally? Have you really considered the implications of that precedent? Blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia. Censorship law in China. Never mind what happens when the laws in two different countries conflict, e.g. privacy vs. data retention.

alistairSH 11y ago
"Brick and mortar" companies deal with this stuff. Why should the tech industry be exempt? If there is profit to be had, the tech giants will figure it out. If there is no profit, then those countries with laws that are on the fringe will have to make do without, or change their laws to be more mainstream. edit - I'm not implying that this is easy. Or, can't be made easier. Only that laws have varied by country for eons and merchants have always found a way to deal.
- jernfrost 11y ago
  But this is already a problem, that hasn't been solved. Facebook e.g. follows essentially American moral standards when censoring. That really crashes with e.g. far more liberal views northern Europe. People post what are regular pictures and accepted social norms in say Scandinavia but which gets removed or accounts closed down or what not because of the far more pious American morality. This is already part of a national debate going on whether we should allow America to define our moral codes and values. If we throw in muslims world which are hundreds of millions of people, then this stuff is going to turn into a big mess. Since I don't live in the middle east, maybe it already is a mess.
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  > "Brick and mortar" companies deal with this stuff. Why should the tech industry be exempt? "Brick and mortar" companies decide where to lay their bricks. You put a website on the internet and it's on the whole internet. In practice you can't even restrict who can access it, as Netflix can attest. Suppose I don't agree with the laws in X country, or they conflict with the law in the country I'm physically in. Is it really going to satisfy anybody if I put "may not access this service from X country" in the terms of service somewhere, implement some fig leaf of a system to prevent access from there that everyone and their mother can bypass in five seconds (or the bypass ends up built into web browsers), and then millions of people from that country access it anyway? How does that help anybody vs. just letting the service operate under the laws of the country where it physically exists and letting the users decide if they want to patronize a service that operates under that jurisdiction's laws? (Unless the goal is to increase the adoption of Tor and other anti-censorship software?)

sbov 11y ago

There is a huge difference. On the internet, by default, you are international. Brick and mortar stores, by default, are only local. We have a website that sells stuff. It is "not available" in Europe. We do not ship to Europe. We block email addresses with European domains and let them know we're not available. We attempt to block Europe ip addresses by geolocating and let them know we're not available in Europe. Yet people from Europe still slip in. We go through several steps to let them know we cannot handle their business, but they still get through. Are we liable? Speaking generally, laws do not necessarily care about any mitigations we take. We could still be fined millions of dollars (more than our revenue) in certain countries despite doing our best to block them. Sorry, but it's completely ridiculous.