3 ms·

1. The export control regulations apply to companies and individuals who do business with any of the sanctioned countries. 2. Discrimination based on ethnicity

1. The export control regulations apply to companies and individuals who do business with any of the sanctioned countries. 2. Discrimination based on ethnicity, religion or political views is forbidden by law. In the absence of proof that this user had business with Iran (or any of the other sanctioned countries) through Slack's platform, the export control regulations do not apply. If the user has business with Iran outside of Slack's platform, Slack can not invoke the export control regulations to justify their action. Ergo, the only thing left here is that Slack broke the law that forbids discrimination based on ethnicity. If the USA fails to punish Slack for it's illegal behavior, and Slack successfully avoids prosecution elsewhere, other country have the right to block access to Slack completely, from within their own borders. Personally, I think US citizens should be more concerned with what their government does, especially to and with other parts of the world. For eventually, the will feel the consequences of those actions on their own skin.

jellicle 8y ago
> Ergo, the only thing left here is that Slack broke the law that forbids discrimination based on ethnicity. That's not how it works. Even if Slack is mistaken in their belief that export regulations apply, their action is still taken in that belief, which is not legally-discriminatory.
- elmo2you 8y ago
  The moment Slack decided to apply a law to justify their action, it became responsible for understanding and correctly apply said law. Their beliefs are irrelevant. If they misunderstood, they are still in violation of the law against discrimination. It is their action that counts here, not their beliefs. Would you say that robbing a bank is okay, if the robber believes that it's okay?
gruez 8y ago
>2. Discrimination based on ethnicity, religion or political views is forbidden by law. >Ergo, the only thing left here is that Slack broke the law that forbids discrimination based on ethnicity. There's no evidence that's the case. Most likely it's done based on IP geolocation. A white (for lack of a better term) Canadian who was using slack in Iran would probably be banned as well. >In the absence of proof that this user had business with Iran (or any of the other sanctioned countries) through Slack's platform, the export control regulations do not apply. Banning based on IP geolocation is not perfect by any means, but what's the alternative here? That you ask suspected Iranian users to check a box saying "I'm not an Iranian, pinky swear!"?
- elmo2you 8y ago
  > Banning based on IP geolocation is not perfect by any means, but what's the alternative here? That you ask suspected Iranian users to check a box saying "I'm not an Iranian, pinky swear!"? The export regulations apply to business. In order for it to apply, there needs to be proof of a business relationship. Simply being Iranian or having non-business related communication with Iran, which is the only thing IP geolocation on its own indicates, does not warrant invoking this law.

jellicle 8y ago

> Ergo, the only thing left here is that Slack broke the law that forbids discrimination based on ethnicity. That's not how it works. Even if Slack is mistaken in their belief that export regulations apply, their action is still taken in that belief, which is not legally-discriminatory.

elmo2you 8y ago
The moment Slack decided to apply a law to justify their action, it became responsible for understanding and correctly apply said law. Their beliefs are irrelevant. If they misunderstood, they are still in violation of the law against discrimination. It is their action that counts here, not their beliefs. Would you say that robbing a bank is okay, if the robber believes that it's okay?

gruez 8y ago

>2. Discrimination based on ethnicity, religion or political views is forbidden by law. >Ergo, the only thing left here is that Slack broke the law that forbids discrimination based on ethnicity. There's no evidence that's the case. Most likely it's done based on IP geolocation. A white (for lack of a better term) Canadian who was using slack in Iran would probably be banned as well. >In the absence of proof that this user had business with Iran (or any of the other sanctioned countries) through Slack's platform, the export control regulations do not apply. Banning based on IP geolocation is not perfect by any means, but what's the alternative here? That you ask suspected Iranian users to check a box saying "I'm not an Iranian, pinky swear!"?

elmo2you 8y ago
> Banning based on IP geolocation is not perfect by any means, but what's the alternative here? That you ask suspected Iranian users to check a box saying "I'm not an Iranian, pinky swear!"? The export regulations apply to business. In order for it to apply, there needs to be proof of a business relationship. Simply being Iranian or having non-business related communication with Iran, which is the only thing IP geolocation on its own indicates, does not warrant invoking this law.