6 ms·

Because this isn’t about content, it’s about OFAC designations. That’s the office in the US Treasury department that says who Americans can’t do business with.

Because this isn’t about content, it’s about OFAC designations. That’s the office in the US Treasury department that says who Americans can’t do business with. They’re the ones that enforce sanctions and Iran is on their list. Penalties for noncompliance are stiff and there are no safe harbour provisions. (IANAL but I have implemented systems to check OFAC lists at other companies and seen it result in similar situations)

walterbell 8y ago
Maybe it's time for Congress to help companies differentiate between: (a) the objectives of laws prohibiting large commercial flows to sanctioned countries and (b) the objectives of laws encouraging many tiny information exchanges on the internet, taking place outside of sanctioned countries Is it worth burning down Internet commerce in the hope of catching a few individuals? Did Congress intend to create a Do-Not-Speak list, or one such list for every Internet company? Should Internet UGC platforms now relocate outside the USA, when Congress is also encouraging companies to repatriate assets to the USA?
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Is it worth burning down Internet commerce in the hope of catching a few individuals? What's happening here isn't an attempt to catch a few individuals. The goal is to put pressure on the entire government of Iran. This is done by making doing business hard for large businesses, as well as individuals, so that pressure to change is put on the Iranian government from above (businesses) and below (the people).
kitd 8y ago
Even if what you say is technically true, Slack appear to have interpreted that as saying that they can't do business with anyone who as ever in the past opened up the Slack app in a designated country, whatever their nationality and/or reason for being there. At the very least, that is a shoddy algorithm.
- mirimir 8y ago
  > ... who as ever in the past opened up the Slack app in a designated country ... But they don't know that. They have IP addresses. And they do geolocation. But IP-based geolocation isn't reliable enough for that.
  - kitd 8y ago
    Well agreed, which makes it worse.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > But they don't know that. They have information from which they conclude that; this information is fallible and conclusions are not certain, but that's true of virtually all “knowledge” about the material world.
eternalban 8y ago
One of the replies to the OP in tweeter says "anyone who is legally an Iranian citizen". That basically covers all naturalized American citizens who emigrated to US from Iran. Iran does not recognize changes in citizenship.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Iran does not recognize changes in citizenship. The U.S. government doesn't care what Iran recognizes. The correct quotation would be "anyone who is legally an Iranian citizen in the eyes of the U.S. government." When an Iranian citizen becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen, their Iranian citizenship is no longer valid in the U.S. There is a limited number of nations that have dual citizenship agreements with the United States, and Iran isn't one of them. https://flagtheory.com/dual-citizenship/ https://flagtheory.com/dual-citizenship/

walterbell 8y ago

Maybe it's time for Congress to help companies differentiate between: (a) the objectives of laws prohibiting large commercial flows to sanctioned countries and (b) the objectives of laws encouraging many tiny information exchanges on the internet, taking place outside of sanctioned countries Is it worth burning down Internet commerce in the hope of catching a few individuals? Did Congress intend to create a Do-Not-Speak list, or one such list for every Internet company? Should Internet UGC platforms now relocate outside the USA, when Congress is also encouraging companies to repatriate assets to the USA?

reaperducer 8y ago
Is it worth burning down Internet commerce in the hope of catching a few individuals? What's happening here isn't an attempt to catch a few individuals. The goal is to put pressure on the entire government of Iran. This is done by making doing business hard for large businesses, as well as individuals, so that pressure to change is put on the Iranian government from above (businesses) and below (the people).

kitd 8y ago

Even if what you say is technically true, Slack appear to have interpreted that as saying that they can't do business with anyone who as ever in the past opened up the Slack app in a designated country, whatever their nationality and/or reason for being there. At the very least, that is a shoddy algorithm.

mirimir 8y ago
> ... who as ever in the past opened up the Slack app in a designated country ... But they don't know that. They have IP addresses. And they do geolocation. But IP-based geolocation isn't reliable enough for that.
- kitd 8y ago
  Well agreed, which makes it worse.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > But they don't know that. They have information from which they conclude that; this information is fallible and conclusions are not certain, but that's true of virtually all “knowledge” about the material world.

eternalban 8y ago

One of the replies to the OP in tweeter says "anyone who is legally an Iranian citizen". That basically covers all naturalized American citizens who emigrated to US from Iran. Iran does not recognize changes in citizenship.

reaperducer 8y ago
Iran does not recognize changes in citizenship. The U.S. government doesn't care what Iran recognizes. The correct quotation would be "anyone who is legally an Iranian citizen in the eyes of the U.S. government." When an Iranian citizen becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen, their Iranian citizenship is no longer valid in the U.S. There is a limited number of nations that have dual citizenship agreements with the United States, and Iran isn't one of them. https://flagtheory.com/dual-citizenship/ https://flagtheory.com/dual-citizenship/