3 ms·

As a government, yes. As a commercial company, operating on a market outside of US jurisdiction, please explain me the legal basis for that (if you can).

JamesBarney 6y ago
The legal basis is they are using a U.S. company (GitHub) that has to has to follow U.S. laws. And that makes certain things inconvenient for them.
scott_s 6y ago
The government where the commercial company is based expects the company to do so, and will hold that company accountable if they do not. You may not agree with this situation, but it is how it works. The US government will investigate and penalize companies that violate US sanctions, even if the parts of those companies involved did so entirely outside of the US.
- delfinom 6y ago
  Yep, the current US administration is somewhat to blame on the shift. It has always been a requirement, it's just that the government up until this admin mostly didn't care to enforce it. It's pretty obvious a number of companies got threatening letters to comply or face jail time.
  - scott_s 6y ago
    When I did some googling, I found an article from 2012 about sanctions enforcement (https://www.itproportal.com/2012/10/26/ibm-questioned-over-alleged-dealings-iran/ https://www.itproportal.com/2012/10/26/ibm-questioned-over-a...). I am unaware of new behavior regarding sanctions enforcement, although I know that the current administration imposed additional sanctions. But my understanding is that with existing sanctions, this is what the US government has always done.
scott00 6y ago
Are there European laws that prohibit discriminating against people who live in Iran? Or that prohibit discriminating against companies who employ people who live in Iran? If not, the legal basis is that you can do anything you want unless it's prohibited by law, and the action in question isn't prohibited by law.
- elmo2you 6y ago
  Yes, it actually is illegal to arbitrarily discriminate people based on their ethnicity, political views or nationality (unless there is a specific law that allows that for a particular nationality, e.g. in case of a legal embargo)
lawnchair_larry 6y ago
They probably did not want to have their CEO nabbed by police in the Vancouver airport for extradition on sanctions violations. You might want to see what happened with Huawei, who aren’t even a US company.
- lodovic 6y ago
  If Huawei wants to do business in the US economy, they can do so but have to abide by the rules. They can also choose to do business with Iran instead, but not both.
  - elmo2you 6y ago
    It appears that you are pretty much the only one who gets it. At least from anyone who responded. I find it rather shameful, that apparently everyone who responded to my question, did so by explaining that a US company has to abide by US law. You don't say! That was never the question, but apparently even reading is even too much to ask from people these days. Of course US companies have to follow US laws. But if that conflicts with law in wherever their services are offered, they no longer have any business operating there. They should consequently stop offering their services in that territory. Since that's unlikely going to happen on their own initiative, maybe the EU should simply declare companies like these as illegal on their market. Actually, that might even help to finally get rid of the stranglehold which many US have had for a long time on any emerging potential competition from EU companies. Something for which US companies have regularly used and abused differences in law and economy (between the US and EU), in order to obtain an (unfair) edge. Maybe it's about time that comes to and end, so US companies can prove that they can compete on equal grounds. I personally doubt that, because for most of the last century this competition has been dominated by the US exploiting artificially created advantages. Politics aside, it's rather sad that this aspect of legality is even a discussion topic. It should be a no-brainer that US companies should abide by whatever laws exist on a foreign market they operate on (of course on top of US law). If they can't, the only (legal) option is to stop operating. Either that, or the company is a criminally operating organization. That is, the violations are systemic and not just a few unintended incidences, of course.
gnopgnip 6y ago
Github is not outside US jurisdiction, and is required to enforce these laws even if the client is in Europe. They could be sanctioned by OFAC if they don't
8note 6y ago
The legal basis is that the US has a big stick, and so all countries must follow us laws, or they'll nuke your capital, rape your children, destroy all your infrastructure, etc. In this case, it's just leaving you to starve, so you're pretty well off on the whole vs other things Americans will do

JamesBarney 6y ago

The legal basis is they are using a U.S. company (GitHub) that has to has to follow U.S. laws. And that makes certain things inconvenient for them.

scott_s 6y ago

The government where the commercial company is based expects the company to do so, and will hold that company accountable if they do not. You may not agree with this situation, but it is how it works. The US government will investigate and penalize companies that violate US sanctions, even if the parts of those companies involved did so entirely outside of the US.

delfinom 6y ago
Yep, the current US administration is somewhat to blame on the shift. It has always been a requirement, it's just that the government up until this admin mostly didn't care to enforce it. It's pretty obvious a number of companies got threatening letters to comply or face jail time.
- scott_s 6y ago
  When I did some googling, I found an article from 2012 about sanctions enforcement (https://www.itproportal.com/2012/10/26/ibm-questioned-over-alleged-dealings-iran/ https://www.itproportal.com/2012/10/26/ibm-questioned-over-a...). I am unaware of new behavior regarding sanctions enforcement, although I know that the current administration imposed additional sanctions. But my understanding is that with existing sanctions, this is what the US government has always done.

scott00 6y ago

Are there European laws that prohibit discriminating against people who live in Iran? Or that prohibit discriminating against companies who employ people who live in Iran? If not, the legal basis is that you can do anything you want unless it's prohibited by law, and the action in question isn't prohibited by law.

elmo2you 6y ago
Yes, it actually is illegal to arbitrarily discriminate people based on their ethnicity, political views or nationality (unless there is a specific law that allows that for a particular nationality, e.g. in case of a legal embargo)

lawnchair_larry 6y ago

They probably did not want to have their CEO nabbed by police in the Vancouver airport for extradition on sanctions violations. You might want to see what happened with Huawei, who aren’t even a US company.

lodovic 6y ago
If Huawei wants to do business in the US economy, they can do so but have to abide by the rules. They can also choose to do business with Iran instead, but not both.
- elmo2you 6y ago
  It appears that you are pretty much the only one who gets it. At least from anyone who responded. I find it rather shameful, that apparently everyone who responded to my question, did so by explaining that a US company has to abide by US law. You don't say! That was never the question, but apparently even reading is even too much to ask from people these days. Of course US companies have to follow US laws. But if that conflicts with law in wherever their services are offered, they no longer have any business operating there. They should consequently stop offering their services in that territory. Since that's unlikely going to happen on their own initiative, maybe the EU should simply declare companies like these as illegal on their market. Actually, that might even help to finally get rid of the stranglehold which many US have had for a long time on any emerging potential competition from EU companies. Something for which US companies have regularly used and abused differences in law and economy (between the US and EU), in order to obtain an (unfair) edge. Maybe it's about time that comes to and end, so US companies can prove that they can compete on equal grounds. I personally doubt that, because for most of the last century this competition has been dominated by the US exploiting artificially created advantages. Politics aside, it's rather sad that this aspect of legality is even a discussion topic. It should be a no-brainer that US companies should abide by whatever laws exist on a foreign market they operate on (of course on top of US law). If they can't, the only (legal) option is to stop operating. Either that, or the company is a criminally operating organization. That is, the violations are systemic and not just a few unintended incidences, of course.

gnopgnip 6y ago

Github is not outside US jurisdiction, and is required to enforce these laws even if the client is in Europe. They could be sanctioned by OFAC if they don't

8note 6y ago

The legal basis is that the US has a big stick, and so all countries must follow us laws, or they'll nuke your capital, rape your children, destroy all your infrastructure, etc. In this case, it's just leaving you to starve, so you're pretty well off on the whole vs other things Americans will do