8 ms·

This sounds like a niche for a small Pacific island. Islands like Jersey and the Cook Islands tailor their legal systems to cater for those who want a looser f

by femto 8y ago

This sounds like a niche for a small Pacific island. Islands like Jersey and the Cook Islands tailor their legal systems to cater for those who want a looser financial system. A small state could tailor their laws for those who want to repair things and potentially make a very nice "high tech" economy out of reverse engineering, importing broken stuff and exporting fixed stuff. Copyright holders might try and block an import, but they would be fighting a harder battle against "parallel import" laws. -- Edit: And they could set up a network of embassies around the world, with integrated repair shops. Instead of visiting the Kiribati embassy to get a visa, you might visit to get your device fixed.

TimTheTinker 8y ago
Brilliant. This is indeed a huge opportunity waiting to be taken by an otherwise stable country that is in need of some cash. Botswana, perhaps?
EvangelicalPig 8y ago
Give me a place with good reverse engineering/copyright laws, legal medical cannabis (long story) and I'll move tomorrow (if only)
ThrustVectoring 8y ago
A tribal nation makes more sense for the US market. >Copyright holders might try and block an import, but they would be fighting a harder battle against "parallel import" laws. They can claim that it's counterfeit, have customs seize it, then force you to file legal action to reclaim your property. Not really the best place to be TBH.
- Analemma_ 8y ago
  Good thinking, but US courts have established that you can’t use tribal nations for IP shenanigans: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/judge-throws-out-allergan-patent-slams-companys-native-american-deal/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/judge-throws-out... (The linked case concerns “evil shenanigans”, in contrast to your proposed “good shenanigans”, but I doubt that argument would carry much sway in court.)
  - ThrustVectoring 8y ago
    I'm aware of the case, just think the courts may take a different stance on "can US copyright law prevent tribal nations from repairing devices" vs "can tribal sovereign immunity be used to preempt US patent law outside of the tribe itself"
- sjwright 8y ago
  Given that Apple doesn't sell its batteries or screen assemblies to anyone in any country, it's therefore impossible for them to be legitimately parallel-imported and therefore trivial for Customs to suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. That's why they're getting caught. But I don't get why anyone is complaining because the solution is INSANELY simple: if you want to parallel import parts from China, make sure they don't have Apple logos printed on them. That's an absurdly low bar to clear. It's so low that it makes me wonder if these controversies are being—pardon the pun—manufactured.
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
    > Given that Apple doesn't sell its batteries or screen assemblies to anyone in any country, it's therefore impossible for them to be legitimately parallel-imported and therefore trivial for Customs to suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. It might surprise you, but Apple does sell all of those. The products that you are looking for are called for example iPhones and MacBooks.
    - sjwright 8y ago
      Apple doesn't sell these parts in bulk quantities and encased in protective plastic films and shims, that for all appearances appears to have come directly from a factory. If Customs sees that, then it's reasonable for them to—let me quote myself—suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. I didn't say they should assume they are.
derefr 8y ago
Apple already has some sort of sweetheart deal with US Customs that gets Apple parts shipped from China rejected at import time unless they're part of an Apple-tracked shipment. This blocks devices have been third-party-repaired in China from being re-imported; but also blocks "ghost-shift" (but otherwise first-party!) Apple parts from coming into the country. Literally, anything that looks like an Apple part, but isn't an Apple part according to Apple, gets blocked. Think about the implications of that. If you can't even import a real part into the US from the very same Chinese factory that the "officially-supplied" parts would be shipped from, then I doubt you'll be able to import those parts from the Cook Islands.
- kirykl 8y ago
  I don’t think that’s so much a sweetheart deal going on but good old money + lawyers
- Someone 8y ago
  ”Literally, anything that looks like an Apple part, but isn't an Apple part according to Apple, gets blocked” If importing Apple-labeled products that aren’t Apple‘s property nor have been sold by Apple were legal, Apple couldn’t outsource production, as it would be undercut by its own manufacturers. So, I don’t see why, in general, you should be able to ”import a real part into the US from the very same Chinese factory that the "officially-supplied" parts would be shipped from”, if you didn’t buy it from Apple.
  - kibibu 8y ago
    Solutions to this that don't require US customs to act as Apple's personal vetting service: 1. Manufacture, or at least assemble, in the US 2. Have better oversight over the factories in China
    - chrisfinazzo 8y ago
      Well, #2 isn't really feasible because of the scale at which they now have to operate in order to meet customers' demand for products (IOW, you can't catch everyone). As for #1, this gets thrown around a fair bit, especially with the current GOP Congress. However people constantly forget that regardless of where final assembly takes place, these jobs are the lowest of the low on the tech food chain. Ripe for automation, a human can easily be replaced by a machine that costs less and can work 24/7/365. Unless people have no other alternatives, these jobs should be avoided at all costs.
Retra 8y ago
Can a country set up an embassy to conduct trade in violation of the host's laws?
- gh02t 8y ago
  Strictly speaking, diplomatic immunity (if granted) would at least allow this hypothetical country's designated diplomats to ignore the consequences, but their diplomatic status would likely simply be revoked.
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
I feel like openly running an illegal business out of your embassy is a quick way to get your diplomats expelled.
- TimTheTinker 8y ago
  The business wouldn’t be illegal, because no physical good or money going in or out would be in violation of the host country’s laws. And exactly what happens inside the embassy isn’t under the host country’s purview, since the embassy grounds belong to the diplomat’s country and are subject to its laws only. If the host country doesn’t like what they suspect is happening inside an embassy, they can go through diplomatic channels to request it be terminated (perhaps with a threat of some kind, like expulsion of the diplomat).

by femto 8y ago

TimTheTinker 8y ago

Brilliant. This is indeed a huge opportunity waiting to be taken by an otherwise stable country that is in need of some cash. Botswana, perhaps?

EvangelicalPig 8y ago

Give me a place with good reverse engineering/copyright laws, legal medical cannabis (long story) and I'll move tomorrow (if only)

ThrustVectoring 8y ago

A tribal nation makes more sense for the US market. >Copyright holders might try and block an import, but they would be fighting a harder battle against "parallel import" laws. They can claim that it's counterfeit, have customs seize it, then force you to file legal action to reclaim your property. Not really the best place to be TBH.

Analemma_ 8y ago
Good thinking, but US courts have established that you can’t use tribal nations for IP shenanigans: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/judge-throws-out-allergan-patent-slams-companys-native-american-deal/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/judge-throws-out... (The linked case concerns “evil shenanigans”, in contrast to your proposed “good shenanigans”, but I doubt that argument would carry much sway in court.)
- ThrustVectoring 8y ago
  I'm aware of the case, just think the courts may take a different stance on "can US copyright law prevent tribal nations from repairing devices" vs "can tribal sovereign immunity be used to preempt US patent law outside of the tribe itself"
sjwright 8y ago
Given that Apple doesn't sell its batteries or screen assemblies to anyone in any country, it's therefore impossible for them to be legitimately parallel-imported and therefore trivial for Customs to suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. That's why they're getting caught. But I don't get why anyone is complaining because the solution is INSANELY simple: if you want to parallel import parts from China, make sure they don't have Apple logos printed on them. That's an absurdly low bar to clear. It's so low that it makes me wonder if these controversies are being—pardon the pun—manufactured.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
  > Given that Apple doesn't sell its batteries or screen assemblies to anyone in any country, it's therefore impossible for them to be legitimately parallel-imported and therefore trivial for Customs to suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. It might surprise you, but Apple does sell all of those. The products that you are looking for are called for example iPhones and MacBooks.
  - sjwright 8y ago
    Apple doesn't sell these parts in bulk quantities and encased in protective plastic films and shims, that for all appearances appears to have come directly from a factory. If Customs sees that, then it's reasonable for them to—let me quote myself—suspect them of being counterfeit or stolen. I didn't say they should assume they are.

derefr 8y ago

Apple already has some sort of sweetheart deal with US Customs that gets Apple parts shipped from China rejected at import time unless they're part of an Apple-tracked shipment. This blocks devices have been third-party-repaired in China from being re-imported; but also blocks "ghost-shift" (but otherwise first-party!) Apple parts from coming into the country. Literally, anything that looks like an Apple part, but isn't an Apple part according to Apple, gets blocked. Think about the implications of that. If you can't even import a real part into the US from the very same Chinese factory that the "officially-supplied" parts would be shipped from, then I doubt you'll be able to import those parts from the Cook Islands.

kirykl 8y ago
I don’t think that’s so much a sweetheart deal going on but good old money + lawyers
Someone 8y ago
”Literally, anything that looks like an Apple part, but isn't an Apple part according to Apple, gets blocked” If importing Apple-labeled products that aren’t Apple‘s property nor have been sold by Apple were legal, Apple couldn’t outsource production, as it would be undercut by its own manufacturers. So, I don’t see why, in general, you should be able to ”import a real part into the US from the very same Chinese factory that the "officially-supplied" parts would be shipped from”, if you didn’t buy it from Apple.
- kibibu 8y ago
  Solutions to this that don't require US customs to act as Apple's personal vetting service: 1. Manufacture, or at least assemble, in the US 2. Have better oversight over the factories in China
  - chrisfinazzo 8y ago
    Well, #2 isn't really feasible because of the scale at which they now have to operate in order to meet customers' demand for products (IOW, you can't catch everyone). As for #1, this gets thrown around a fair bit, especially with the current GOP Congress. However people constantly forget that regardless of where final assembly takes place, these jobs are the lowest of the low on the tech food chain. Ripe for automation, a human can easily be replaced by a machine that costs less and can work 24/7/365. Unless people have no other alternatives, these jobs should be avoided at all costs.

Retra 8y ago

Can a country set up an embassy to conduct trade in violation of the host's laws?

gh02t 8y ago
Strictly speaking, diplomatic immunity (if granted) would at least allow this hypothetical country's designated diplomats to ignore the consequences, but their diplomatic status would likely simply be revoked.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

I feel like openly running an illegal business out of your embassy is a quick way to get your diplomats expelled.

TimTheTinker 8y ago
The business wouldn’t be illegal, because no physical good or money going in or out would be in violation of the host country’s laws. And exactly what happens inside the embassy isn’t under the host country’s purview, since the embassy grounds belong to the diplomat’s country and are subject to its laws only. If the host country doesn’t like what they suspect is happening inside an embassy, they can go through diplomatic channels to request it be terminated (perhaps with a threat of some kind, like expulsion of the diplomat).