6 ms·

Politics aside, this feels like a good policy question? How do laws apply in the context of a global platform like Facebook. Something may be in violation of a

Politics aside, this feels like a good policy question? How do laws apply in the context of a global platform like Facebook. Something may be in violation of a law in one country, but be totally acceptable in another. Should sovereign citizens on one country be subjected to laws of another? If Twitter files showed us anything, posts get taken down at the request of the government (including US and Canada).

JStanton617 3y ago
India (among other countries) have passed so called "hostage-taking laws" that require large social media companies to have in-country employees that can be strong-armed from ways small to large (threats of being convicted of treason and executed). This is a specific policy to allow them to enforce their censorship laws in other countries.
- Zak 3y ago
  Do they have options to enforce that other than blocking access to the service in question?
  - zie 3y ago
    If there is a single Facebook employee on Indian soil, that Facebook cares about, then obviously, yes they can enforce it, simply by being mean to those Facebook employee(s). It seems like India's stance is: If you want to do business in India, you have to have employees you care about on our soil, so we can be mean to them if you do something we don't like. Facebook's stance appears to be: We like your money enough that we will comply with this. I'm just glad I'm not one of those Facebook employees.
    - tamimio 3y ago
      > I'm just glad I'm not one of those Facebook employees. Nor a facebook user.
  - kelnos 3y ago
    I think the option you mention is quite potent. "Either have employees in-country so we can intimidate them so you'll do what we want, or we block your service." Sounds pretty effective? Sure, some people will get around the blocks, but it'll be a relatively small percentage (especially if the government makes circumventing these blocks illegal, most people won't find it worth any risk to do it anyway), and your service will be effectively destroyed in that country.
    - Zak 3y ago
      Blocking something that's very popular could backfire, and I believe Facebook is very popular in India.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    Kafka trails for employees in the country...
barkingcat 3y ago
There's a ton of precedence of American companies applying American laws universally across the world (regardless of whether it's applicable by jurisdiction) in IP cases, in trade issues, etc. many times it's easiest to just have 1 set of rules across the planet, so companies end up with following the lowest common denominator of legal actions and policies. (even if these policies are illegal in other jurisdictions. Many cases, American companies just go ahead with the illegal policies and then pay the fine in each country where it is found to be acting illegally. The fines are not even sufficient to be rounding errors of their operating budget in many cases so they just break laws at will just so that it's easier to match the policies around the world).
- russdill 3y ago
  In general, cross border enforcement of trade and IP law are governed by relevant treaties.
- blululu 3y ago
  There are two differences: First, American law does not apply globally and makes no demands to apply globally. If companies do so it is a matter of convenience and not policy. While companies may petition the US government to apply pressure on allied countries to influence policy there is no presumption that American law will apply in a foreign country outside of what is circumscribed by treaties. Second there is the matter of positive vs negative laws. American law doesn’t prohibit much by way of publishing or collecting information in public spaces. Applying American laws globally results lack of a compliance in countries with stricter laws. The law in question actually prohibits something. What results is actually a greatest common denominator of law.
  - pclmulqdq 3y ago
    American law absolutely applies globally when it is applied to American citizens. People who don't realize this routinely end up in jail. Stuff like the drinking age (a state law) doesn't apply, but federal laws do apply, which is why American citizens who go abroad to commit gang-related crimes (and more stupidly, break fishing and hunting restrictions) are still arrested when they return despite the fact that no aspect of the crime touched American soil.
Waterluvian 3y ago
If you want access to that country's market, you are thrall to their potentially half-baked, wannabe democracy dictator-like decisions. I think it's really that simple. Facebook can say "we will obey whatever your laws decide" to every country. Or it can say "deal with it. Block us." And I think it already happens that way for many countries.

JStanton617 3y ago

India (among other countries) have passed so called "hostage-taking laws" that require large social media companies to have in-country employees that can be strong-armed from ways small to large (threats of being convicted of treason and executed). This is a specific policy to allow them to enforce their censorship laws in other countries.

Zak 3y ago
Do they have options to enforce that other than blocking access to the service in question?
- zie 3y ago
  If there is a single Facebook employee on Indian soil, that Facebook cares about, then obviously, yes they can enforce it, simply by being mean to those Facebook employee(s). It seems like India's stance is: If you want to do business in India, you have to have employees you care about on our soil, so we can be mean to them if you do something we don't like. Facebook's stance appears to be: We like your money enough that we will comply with this. I'm just glad I'm not one of those Facebook employees.
  - tamimio 3y ago
    > I'm just glad I'm not one of those Facebook employees. Nor a facebook user.
- kelnos 3y ago
  I think the option you mention is quite potent. "Either have employees in-country so we can intimidate them so you'll do what we want, or we block your service." Sounds pretty effective? Sure, some people will get around the blocks, but it'll be a relatively small percentage (especially if the government makes circumventing these blocks illegal, most people won't find it worth any risk to do it anyway), and your service will be effectively destroyed in that country.
  - Zak 3y ago
    Blocking something that's very popular could backfire, and I believe Facebook is very popular in India.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  Kafka trails for employees in the country...

barkingcat 3y ago

There's a ton of precedence of American companies applying American laws universally across the world (regardless of whether it's applicable by jurisdiction) in IP cases, in trade issues, etc. many times it's easiest to just have 1 set of rules across the planet, so companies end up with following the lowest common denominator of legal actions and policies. (even if these policies are illegal in other jurisdictions. Many cases, American companies just go ahead with the illegal policies and then pay the fine in each country where it is found to be acting illegally. The fines are not even sufficient to be rounding errors of their operating budget in many cases so they just break laws at will just so that it's easier to match the policies around the world).

russdill 3y ago
In general, cross border enforcement of trade and IP law are governed by relevant treaties.
blululu 3y ago
There are two differences: First, American law does not apply globally and makes no demands to apply globally. If companies do so it is a matter of convenience and not policy. While companies may petition the US government to apply pressure on allied countries to influence policy there is no presumption that American law will apply in a foreign country outside of what is circumscribed by treaties. Second there is the matter of positive vs negative laws. American law doesn’t prohibit much by way of publishing or collecting information in public spaces. Applying American laws globally results lack of a compliance in countries with stricter laws. The law in question actually prohibits something. What results is actually a greatest common denominator of law.
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  American law absolutely applies globally when it is applied to American citizens. People who don't realize this routinely end up in jail. Stuff like the drinking age (a state law) doesn't apply, but federal laws do apply, which is why American citizens who go abroad to commit gang-related crimes (and more stupidly, break fishing and hunting restrictions) are still arrested when they return despite the fact that no aspect of the crime touched American soil.

Waterluvian 3y ago

If you want access to that country's market, you are thrall to their potentially half-baked, wannabe democracy dictator-like decisions. I think it's really that simple. Facebook can say "we will obey whatever your laws decide" to every country. Or it can say "deal with it. Block us." And I think it already happens that way for many countries.