3 ms·
Why should it not? If you're providing a service (presumably for profit), shouldn't you be bound by rules other commercial service providers have to follow in t
by bantunes 3y ago
Why should it not? If you're providing a service (presumably for profit), shouldn't you be bound by rules other commercial service providers have to follow in that jurisdiction as well? If not, you'd be at a massive advantage.
- golemotron 3y agoIt's not being provided in that jurisdiction. If you are hosted/domiciled in a country foreign users are entering another jurisdiction when they access the service.
- bantunes 3y agoIf you're taking money in that jurisdiction, why is it not "being provided"?
- golemotron 3y agoAnother way to look at it is that customer is sending money to another jurisdiction. Countries can and do pass laws about whom their citizens can trade with. It seems like that is a better route than inventing jurisdiction over foreign companies.
- bantunes 3y agoAgain, if you "pass laws about whom their citizens can trade with" isn't that having jurisdiction over a foreign company?
- golemotron 3y agoNot at all. They never are subject to an enforceable court decision. Your citizens, on the other hand, are.
- bantunes 3y agoFrom the point of view of the consumer, if a government passes a law saying you can't buy abroad from Company X, sure feels like jurisdiction over it.
- golemotron 3y agoLet's do it that way then. Problem solved.