4 ms·

> If your website breaks moral decency laws in Saudi Arabia, and a court there orders you to close your website, would you comply? Strawman, because we aren't

by jhasse 9y ago

> If your website breaks moral decency laws in Saudi Arabia, and a court there orders you to close your website, would you comply? Strawman, because we aren't talking about closing a website, but just blocking access from one country. Regarding your example: Yes, I would comply and block access from Saudi Arabia to my website.

gambiting 9y ago
But....why? In a certain way, it's just some random court from a country you've never been to ordering you to do something. Why would you comply. There are ways foreign entities and governments can pursue an American company through the American legal system - the plaintiff decided not to do that here and decided to go through the German system instead. Which is all fine and dandy, but I still don't understand why an American company with no legal presence in Germany should obey rulings of the German court.
- jhasse 9y ago
  > But....why? In a certain way, it's just some random court from a country you've never been to ordering you to do something. Why would you comply. In the beginning (like it was in this case with gutenberg.org), it isn't a court order, but just an email, asking me if I could respect their local laws. Books becoming public domain example: In Germany it's 75 years after the author's death, in the US some amount of years after the publication. Who am I to judge which approach is "right"? Btw: We're suffering quite a lot here in Germany because of software patents in the US. > Which is all fine and dandy, but I still don't understand why an American company with no legal presence in Germany should obey rulings of the German court. Don't you consider a website in German, accessible from Germany, which looks totally legal for most Germans as some kind of legal presence in Germany?
  - trothamel 9y ago
    > Don't you consider a website in German, accessible from Germany, which looks totally legal for most Germans as some kind of legal presence in Germany? No. The site is created in some set of locations, and is hosted on servers in some set of locations. If none of those locations is in Germany, Germany has no personal jurisdiction. (At least under US law, which is what counts when it comes to enforcing judgement against someone in the US.)
    - jhasse 9y ago
      But then German ISPs will be ordered to block the content in Germany. I don't know what's better, at least now the gutenberg.org frontpage is still accessible and theres an explanation which wouldn't be the case with an DNS block.
      - trothamel 9y ago
        The German ISPs blocking the content is far better. In that case, Germans are living by German laws, and Americans are living by US laws. The alternative is to expect everyone to live by any law anywhere in the world, which is probably impossible in cases where things conflict.
        jhasse 9y ago
        > everyone to live by any law anywhere The site is obly blocked in Germany.
        gambiting 9y ago
        Sure, but Germans having an issue with an American site just cost that American company €50,000 for no reason at all. I agree with the poster saying that if Germany had an issue with content they could have just blocked the website themselves.
        jhasse 9y ago
        The books being available for download for free might have cost a German company even more. So I wouldn't say "no reason at all".
        gambiting 9y ago
        Like I said before - there is a legal path for foreign companies to sue American companies under the American legal system. If the plaintiff could demonstrate loses due to actions by project Gutenberg, I'm 100% certain that an American court would have ruled in favour of the plaintiff. But this €50k isn't even going to the publisher - it's in fees to the German court system, which - in my opinion - could have been completely and totally ignored. So when I said "no reason at all" I meant that PG will now be paying €50k for something that they shouldn't be a part of.
- gowld 9y ago
  There's no reason to obey a foreign order, as long as (1) your jurisdiction's authority doesn't extradite, and (2) you never enter the reach of jurisdiction you offended,
cloakandswagger 9y ago
Do you have immense respect for Saudi Arabia's legal system, or fear of recourse from them? Do you just enjoy being subjugated? If a country doesn't like my site, they're free to block it themselves instead of compelling me to.
- jhasse 9y ago
  I would think that if Saudi Arabia can't access my website, it's their loss, not mine ;)
  - gowld 9y ago
    Confusing the government of a country with its residents, especially a dictatorship like Saudi Arabia, is a harmful error. Sure, it's not your loss, but it's not their loss either -- it's innocent 3rd party's loss.
    - mcguire 9y ago
      At some point, the residents of a country are responsible for its government. The inverse of the "consent of the governed" principle.
      - stale2002 9y ago
        Saudi Arabia is run by a king. Its citizens don't get to vote them out of office. They are ruled by a dictator and many of them do NOT consent to being governed by the dictator. Just because they'd get slaughtered in a revolt and don't have the ability to overthrow the king, doesn't mean that they have consented to the actions of the unelected people ruling over them.
mcguire 9y ago
https://cand.pglaf.org/germany/gutenberg-lawsuit-judgement-EN.pdf https://cand.pglaf.org/germany/gutenberg-lawsuit-judgement-E... "The defendants are ordered, on penalty of an administrative fine of up to EUR 250,000.00 or, alternatively, imprisonment of up to 6 months, for each case of non- compliance, said imprisonment to be imposed on the second defendant, to cease and desist from making the following works publicly available or letting them be made publicly available, namely:..."

by jhasse 9y ago

gambiting 9y ago

But....why? In a certain way, it's just some random court from a country you've never been to ordering you to do something. Why would you comply. There are ways foreign entities and governments can pursue an American company through the American legal system - the plaintiff decided not to do that here and decided to go through the German system instead. Which is all fine and dandy, but I still don't understand why an American company with no legal presence in Germany should obey rulings of the German court.

jhasse 9y ago
> But....why? In a certain way, it's just some random court from a country you've never been to ordering you to do something. Why would you comply. In the beginning (like it was in this case with gutenberg.org), it isn't a court order, but just an email, asking me if I could respect their local laws. Books becoming public domain example: In Germany it's 75 years after the author's death, in the US some amount of years after the publication. Who am I to judge which approach is "right"? Btw: We're suffering quite a lot here in Germany because of software patents in the US. > Which is all fine and dandy, but I still don't understand why an American company with no legal presence in Germany should obey rulings of the German court. Don't you consider a website in German, accessible from Germany, which looks totally legal for most Germans as some kind of legal presence in Germany?
- trothamel 9y ago
  > Don't you consider a website in German, accessible from Germany, which looks totally legal for most Germans as some kind of legal presence in Germany? No. The site is created in some set of locations, and is hosted on servers in some set of locations. If none of those locations is in Germany, Germany has no personal jurisdiction. (At least under US law, which is what counts when it comes to enforcing judgement against someone in the US.)
  - jhasse 9y ago
    But then German ISPs will be ordered to block the content in Germany. I don't know what's better, at least now the gutenberg.org frontpage is still accessible and theres an explanation which wouldn't be the case with an DNS block.
    - trothamel 9y ago
      The German ISPs blocking the content is far better. In that case, Germans are living by German laws, and Americans are living by US laws. The alternative is to expect everyone to live by any law anywhere in the world, which is probably impossible in cases where things conflict.
      - jhasse 9y ago
        > everyone to live by any law anywhere The site is obly blocked in Germany.
        gambiting 9y ago
        Sure, but Germans having an issue with an American site just cost that American company €50,000 for no reason at all. I agree with the poster saying that if Germany had an issue with content they could have just blocked the website themselves.
        jhasse 9y ago
        The books being available for download for free might have cost a German company even more. So I wouldn't say "no reason at all".
        gambiting 9y ago
        Like I said before - there is a legal path for foreign companies to sue American companies under the American legal system. If the plaintiff could demonstrate loses due to actions by project Gutenberg, I'm 100% certain that an American court would have ruled in favour of the plaintiff. But this €50k isn't even going to the publisher - it's in fees to the German court system, which - in my opinion - could have been completely and totally ignored. So when I said "no reason at all" I meant that PG will now be paying €50k for something that they shouldn't be a part of.
gowld 9y ago
There's no reason to obey a foreign order, as long as (1) your jurisdiction's authority doesn't extradite, and (2) you never enter the reach of jurisdiction you offended,

cloakandswagger 9y ago

Do you have immense respect for Saudi Arabia's legal system, or fear of recourse from them? Do you just enjoy being subjugated? If a country doesn't like my site, they're free to block it themselves instead of compelling me to.

jhasse 9y ago
I would think that if Saudi Arabia can't access my website, it's their loss, not mine ;)
- gowld 9y ago
  Confusing the government of a country with its residents, especially a dictatorship like Saudi Arabia, is a harmful error. Sure, it's not your loss, but it's not their loss either -- it's innocent 3rd party's loss.
  - mcguire 9y ago
    At some point, the residents of a country are responsible for its government. The inverse of the "consent of the governed" principle.
    - stale2002 9y ago
      Saudi Arabia is run by a king. Its citizens don't get to vote them out of office. They are ruled by a dictator and many of them do NOT consent to being governed by the dictator. Just because they'd get slaughtered in a revolt and don't have the ability to overthrow the king, doesn't mean that they have consented to the actions of the unelected people ruling over them.

mcguire 9y ago

https://cand.pglaf.org/germany/gutenberg-lawsuit-judgement-EN.pdf https://cand.pglaf.org/germany/gutenberg-lawsuit-judgement-E... "The defendants are ordered, on penalty of an administrative fine of up to EUR 250,000.00 or, alternatively, imprisonment of up to 6 months, for each case of non- compliance, said imprisonment to be imposed on the second defendant, to cease and desist from making the following works publicly available or letting them be made publicly available, namely:..."