6 ms·

If tech companies and nation states started enforcing/obeying laws based on the Nationality Principle, then FB/Google/AMZN and other data collecting firms would

If tech companies and nation states started enforcing/obeying laws based on the Nationality Principle, then FB/Google/AMZN and other data collecting firms would be allowed to ignore GDPR on the principal that the developers are in the US and thus they don't have to follow local laws. That's one example, but there are numerous others, some worse and some harmless. Either way, it's a problem for everyone. What laws do you follow, which laws are enforced, how many laws are being broken by a developer that is just trying to publish a fun app. There are ways for a government to project their laws on another nation, but Nationality Principle is not one of them. An example of one country projecting laws onto other countries are the US Anti-Money Laundering laws that the US doesn't even follow but they demand every foreign government that uses USD to follow.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
> If tech companies and nation states started enforcing/obeying laws based on the Nationality Principle, then FB/Google/AMZN and other data collecting firms would be allowed to ignore GDPR on the principal that the developers are in the US and thus they don't have to follow local laws. The developers are in the US. They don't have to follow local laws anywhere else. This is a fundamental principle of international relations dating back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. This international order is a major reason why we can have nice things, like peace, instead of unending war. It is, of course, possible for the nation to ban these entities from conducting business in their jurisdiction. If such entities preferred to stay out of Europe and lose that business, it would be further possible for the nation to ban its citizens from accessing Facebook and similar businesses via the Internet; the general pursuit of liability consequences which Europe has attached to the GDPR has produced a sort of soft-ban, as any European who has seen a notice from a US newspaper can attest. This is of course quite ugly, but typical GDPR-boosters sometimes seem to think that anyone who doesn't kowtow to the European order is fundamentally Evil and would like to distract you with this fact, while they seek stronger ways to protect their citizens from treacherous foreign newspapers. We are able to maintain a stable global system with international trade in no small part because most jurisdictions don't try to do the same, legislating what foreign actors may and may not do in their own countries as a condition of their business. This system is eroding — the GDPR didn't actually start it, the US did — and it is likely to have many unfortunate consequences in years to come. Among other things, Europe is of the opinion that GDPR and its fines must be enforced in future trade agreements, but it is fundamentally incompatible with the US Constitution and its first amendment (the "Right to be Forgotten" in particular).
- labster 5y ago
  The Westphalian regime is long dead. Minor breaches haves happened before. Then major ones, like the Nuremberg trials. The internet finally killed it. Nation states routinely engage in internet crimes, for theft of money and IP, denial of service, and (still rare) property damage. This is the world we built together, where we can cause harm to anyone across the world without leaving home.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > dating back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. This international order is a major reason why we can have nice things, like peace, instead of unending war Westphalian sovereignty has been a myth for centuries. It is incompatible with international trade. It is incompatible with Nuremberg. And it’s internally inconsistent, giving no guidance as to which historical borders are the correct ones nor what counts as domestic versus international concern. (Spoiler: anyone can find some point in time when they had legitimate claim to almost anything, and anyone can deem almost anything domestic or international.) None of the Treaties’ signatory states exist today. None of them were democracies. Citing it is akin to bringing up the elements of fire and earth in a physics lecture.
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    People being what they are, of course that the result wasn't perfect. But compared to the previous 150 years of intermittent religiously motivated wars, some of them fairly long (the 30 Year War really took 30 years from start to finish), Westphalian peace was a major improvement in quality of life. In 1648, many regions of Central Europe were essentially depopulated by the incessant fighting and looting.
- Mindwipe 5y ago
  > We are able to maintain a stable global system with international trade in no small part because most jurisdictions don't try to do the same, legislating what foreign actors may and may not do in their own countries as a condition of their business. This is literally nonsense. All countries do this, and have done for the entire modern era.

fennecfoxen 5y ago

> If tech companies and nation states started enforcing/obeying laws based on the Nationality Principle, then FB/Google/AMZN and other data collecting firms would be allowed to ignore GDPR on the principal that the developers are in the US and thus they don't have to follow local laws. The developers are in the US. They don't have to follow local laws anywhere else. This is a fundamental principle of international relations dating back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. This international order is a major reason why we can have nice things, like peace, instead of unending war. It is, of course, possible for the nation to ban these entities from conducting business in their jurisdiction. If such entities preferred to stay out of Europe and lose that business, it would be further possible for the nation to ban its citizens from accessing Facebook and similar businesses via the Internet; the general pursuit of liability consequences which Europe has attached to the GDPR has produced a sort of soft-ban, as any European who has seen a notice from a US newspaper can attest. This is of course quite ugly, but typical GDPR-boosters sometimes seem to think that anyone who doesn't kowtow to the European order is fundamentally Evil and would like to distract you with this fact, while they seek stronger ways to protect their citizens from treacherous foreign newspapers. We are able to maintain a stable global system with international trade in no small part because most jurisdictions don't try to do the same, legislating what foreign actors may and may not do in their own countries as a condition of their business. This system is eroding — the GDPR didn't actually start it, the US did — and it is likely to have many unfortunate consequences in years to come. Among other things, Europe is of the opinion that GDPR and its fines must be enforced in future trade agreements, but it is fundamentally incompatible with the US Constitution and its first amendment (the "Right to be Forgotten" in particular).

labster 5y ago
The Westphalian regime is long dead. Minor breaches haves happened before. Then major ones, like the Nuremberg trials. The internet finally killed it. Nation states routinely engage in internet crimes, for theft of money and IP, denial of service, and (still rare) property damage. This is the world we built together, where we can cause harm to anyone across the world without leaving home.
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> dating back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. This international order is a major reason why we can have nice things, like peace, instead of unending war Westphalian sovereignty has been a myth for centuries. It is incompatible with international trade. It is incompatible with Nuremberg. And it’s internally inconsistent, giving no guidance as to which historical borders are the correct ones nor what counts as domestic versus international concern. (Spoiler: anyone can find some point in time when they had legitimate claim to almost anything, and anyone can deem almost anything domestic or international.) None of the Treaties’ signatory states exist today. None of them were democracies. Citing it is akin to bringing up the elements of fire and earth in a physics lecture.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  People being what they are, of course that the result wasn't perfect. But compared to the previous 150 years of intermittent religiously motivated wars, some of them fairly long (the 30 Year War really took 30 years from start to finish), Westphalian peace was a major improvement in quality of life. In 1648, many regions of Central Europe were essentially depopulated by the incessant fighting and looting.
Mindwipe 5y ago
> We are able to maintain a stable global system with international trade in no small part because most jurisdictions don't try to do the same, legislating what foreign actors may and may not do in their own countries as a condition of their business. This is literally nonsense. All countries do this, and have done for the entire modern era.