4 ms·
For Europe: see GDPR It’s entirely common for countries to have codes that affect those outside their borders - especially ones that were agreed upon in treaty
by theferalrobot 6y ago
For Europe: see GDPR
It’s entirely common for countries to have codes that affect those outside their borders - especially ones that were agreed upon in treaty or trade deal. What is unique here is a country demanding that a non local company engage in censorship outside its territory. These two things are nothing alike
- DiogenesKynikos 6y agoForcing the entire world to stop trading with a country is way more serious than forcing a nonlocal video conferencing company to suspend an account. The extraterritorial application of US economic sanctions goes way beyond anything any other country is doing to impose its laws abroad.
- theferalrobot 6y agoYou are referring to things that were agreed to in international treaties and trade negotiations - again these sorts of things are super common
- DiogenesKynikos 6y agoNo, I'm referring to unilateral measures the US takes to force countries that do not themselves have sanctions against Iran and Cubs to stop trading with those countries. These secondary sanctions are not based on international treaties and trade negotiations. They're based on levers of power that the US possesses and exploits, much to the chagrin of foreign countries. They are also not common. There's no other country that comes close to imposing its trade policy on the rest of the world in this manner.
- theferalrobot 6y ago> These secondary sanctions are not based on international treaties and trade negotiations You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about - these things don’t just happen overnight cause the US says so. Sanctions in this case have been discussed and formalized by multiple groups and organizations including OECD, FATF and the UN Security Council.