4 ms·
well this is the way legislation works, it's considered bad form to call them out by name so you choose some few characteristics that apply to them which has th
by bryanrasmussen 4y ago
well this is the way legislation works, it's considered bad form to call them out by name so you choose some few characteristics that apply to them which has the side benefit that if in the future some other company comes along with those characteristics the same laws apply to them.
- afiori 4y agoAlso I am quite sure that such a law would be unconstitutional in a lot of places.
- harywilke 4y agoyup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder
- int_19h 4y agoIt would only be a bill of attainder if it used arbitrary characteristics not relevant to the stated purpose of the bill to target specific companies. The definition cited is not arbitrary in that sense - it targets large companies in specific markets, and there's an obvious rational connection with the stated purpose.
- afiori 4y agoI believe that both comment are trying to say that: - Google and Apple must do X => unconstitutional - All Companies bigger than X with chat-like apps and an app store and a near-oligopoly OS must do X => probably constitutional - All Companies such that (proceed to list dozen of random characteristics meant to only ever apply to Google and Apple ) must do X => probably unconstitutional
- bryanrasmussen 4y agoyes, although I didn't want to specifically say this was the case in EU as I'm not sure. But probably is.