11 ms·

They shouldn't, but it's not their problem. If I, as the prince of Princeton, was to pass a law that each time one of my subjects visits your website, you must

They shouldn't, but it's not their problem. If I, as the prince of Princeton, was to pass a law that each time one of my subjects visits your website, you must pay me $1, you'd think that's mad. And you'd be right - since you're not bound by Princeton laws. The EU is claiming that sites in other countries are bound by EU laws - and that's just as wrong as if Princeton passed the laws.

Semaphor 8y ago
Countries (or conglomerates of them) applying their laws world-wide has long been what the US does on the internet. It's a bit too late to put that genie back in the bottle.
- hnra 8y ago
  A website hosted outside of US jurisdiction will rarely get in trouble for breaking US specific laws.
  - robin_reala 8y ago
    But if the owners of that website visit the US they’re liable to be arrested (assuming the site has enough impact). Same in reverse.
  - Semaphor 8y ago
    Kim Dotcom and Megaupload is probably the biggest current and ongoing counterargument. But it's been standard behavior in other cases.
    - hnra 8y ago
      Which is why I added rarely; personally I was thinking of thepiratebay trials in Sweden. I do believe both Mega and TPB are as a result of breaking US law but TPB was at least tried in Sweden and found to be breaking Swedish law, not sure if the same goes/went for Kim.
      - johannes1234321 8y ago
        The question is: Are you breaking the Swedish law while targeting Swedish people? For isntance: Germany has laws around limiting usage of Nazi symbolism. If you create a web page glorifying Nazis and their symbols this is illegal under German law. If you run such a site targeting Americans no German state attorney or Court will take the case (exceptions exist for stupidity or ego or power play reasons) however if you host a page in the U.S. aiming at German Nazis that way (for example by commenting on German politics and German language) they will try to go after you. (Which might not lead far, as the site is probably protected by US freedom of speech, thus US authorities won't assist, but you might want to avoid travelling to Germany and countries which might cooperate with Germany) P.S. I don't want to imply that you have any such plans for such a site, but it's a specific example working fully virtual
BlackFly 8y ago
Legally, the EU is claiming that if you do certain things which affect EU residents, then it will declare a judgment against you regardless of where you were when you did those things. This idea is not new and certainly is not seen as unequivocally wrong in law. If you produce libel against someone from another country, that person may sue you in their home country. That you performed the libel in another country is not generally seen as problematic to the libel laws of most countries. The US may refuse to recognize the judgment and you are fine as long as you do not travel to said country or a country with extradition agreements.
maeln 8y ago
The US as a ban on banks to do business with Iran. This also affect bank that are not US-based but do business with US (see [1]). The banks are free to do business with Iran, but they will then get ban from doing business in the US. The GDPR is exactly the same. EU says that you have to comply with the GDPR if you process EU-citizen data. So company have the same choice: Comply with the EU GDPR or don't do business with the EU. I don't think it happen yet, and I think that the framework for this is not even ready yet, but nothing would prevent EU from banning your service in the EU if you don't want to comply with the EU GDPR. I honestly don't understand why there is such an outcry about it. It always worked like this: you want to do business with a country, you apply the law of the country. Internet is not a magical international space with no regulation. You can argue that this kind of laws, that is a form of protectionism in a way, is bad. But it has been this way for a very long time and GDPR is absolutely not the first time such a law was put in place. Just another example, if you are a US citizen creating a bank account in the EU, the bank (even if it is a EU bank), will have to declare it to US authorities (apparently due to your tax system that also apply if you are resident abroad). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions_against_Iran#Sanctions_against_third_parties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions_agains...

Semaphor 8y ago

Countries (or conglomerates of them) applying their laws world-wide has long been what the US does on the internet. It's a bit too late to put that genie back in the bottle.

hnra 8y ago
A website hosted outside of US jurisdiction will rarely get in trouble for breaking US specific laws.
- robin_reala 8y ago
  But if the owners of that website visit the US they’re liable to be arrested (assuming the site has enough impact). Same in reverse.
- Semaphor 8y ago
  Kim Dotcom and Megaupload is probably the biggest current and ongoing counterargument. But it's been standard behavior in other cases.
  - hnra 8y ago
    Which is why I added rarely; personally I was thinking of thepiratebay trials in Sweden. I do believe both Mega and TPB are as a result of breaking US law but TPB was at least tried in Sweden and found to be breaking Swedish law, not sure if the same goes/went for Kim.
    - johannes1234321 8y ago
      The question is: Are you breaking the Swedish law while targeting Swedish people? For isntance: Germany has laws around limiting usage of Nazi symbolism. If you create a web page glorifying Nazis and their symbols this is illegal under German law. If you run such a site targeting Americans no German state attorney or Court will take the case (exceptions exist for stupidity or ego or power play reasons) however if you host a page in the U.S. aiming at German Nazis that way (for example by commenting on German politics and German language) they will try to go after you. (Which might not lead far, as the site is probably protected by US freedom of speech, thus US authorities won't assist, but you might want to avoid travelling to Germany and countries which might cooperate with Germany) P.S. I don't want to imply that you have any such plans for such a site, but it's a specific example working fully virtual

BlackFly 8y ago

Legally, the EU is claiming that if you do certain things which affect EU residents, then it will declare a judgment against you regardless of where you were when you did those things. This idea is not new and certainly is not seen as unequivocally wrong in law. If you produce libel against someone from another country, that person may sue you in their home country. That you performed the libel in another country is not generally seen as problematic to the libel laws of most countries. The US may refuse to recognize the judgment and you are fine as long as you do not travel to said country or a country with extradition agreements.

maeln 8y ago

The US as a ban on banks to do business with Iran. This also affect bank that are not US-based but do business with US (see [1]). The banks are free to do business with Iran, but they will then get ban from doing business in the US. The GDPR is exactly the same. EU says that you have to comply with the GDPR if you process EU-citizen data. So company have the same choice: Comply with the EU GDPR or don't do business with the EU. I don't think it happen yet, and I think that the framework for this is not even ready yet, but nothing would prevent EU from banning your service in the EU if you don't want to comply with the EU GDPR. I honestly don't understand why there is such an outcry about it. It always worked like this: you want to do business with a country, you apply the law of the country. Internet is not a magical international space with no regulation. You can argue that this kind of laws, that is a form of protectionism in a way, is bad. But it has been this way for a very long time and GDPR is absolutely not the first time such a law was put in place. Just another example, if you are a US citizen creating a bank account in the EU, the bank (even if it is a EU bank), will have to declare it to US authorities (apparently due to your tax system that also apply if you are resident abroad). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions_against_Iran#Sanctions_against_third_parties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions_agains...