4 ms·

I'm not sure if it will actually happen. But the theoretical "problem" with these "X% of worldwide revenue" fines is that they change the calculus of launching

I'm not sure if it will actually happen. But the theoretical "problem" with these "X% of worldwide revenue" fines is that they change the calculus of launching an existing product in Europe. It makes it so that if a company enters the EU they risk it being a net negative to revenue.

vanviegen 2y ago
Isn't that exactly the intended effect? Otherwise, why wouldn't BigCorp just ignore any inconvenient laws?
- returningfory2 2y ago
  I don't understand, are you saying the intended effect of these laws is that non-EU countries don't enter the EU market?
  - vanviegen 2y ago
    Not necessarily, but it should "change the calculus of launching an existing product in Europe", factoring in privacy laws. Either don't launch, or make sure that your product complies.
    - andersa 2y ago
      It isn't possible for an American company to actually comply.
      - max51 2y ago
        That's not a EU problem. If the US puts laws in place that prevents their company from expending overseas, that's a problem that Americans need to fix.
        andersa 2y ago
        There is nothing the companies can do about it.
        com 2y ago
        They can lobby, right? I mean what are those $billions being spent on? Weakening environmental or consumer protections?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - returningfory2 2y ago
      Yeah. But even if you act in good faith there's still a chance you'll make mistakes and run afoul of the law. And now the cost of a mistake is not "we'll end up losing money in this new market" it's "our business might fail worldwide".
  - max51 2y ago
    The intended effect is that they follow the law, it's really not that complicated. Why do people assume that US-based companies have this inalienable right to break any law they want in every country around the world and that we all have to cheer for them when they do it?

4 ms·

I'm not sure if it will actually happen. But the theoretical "problem" with these "X% of worldwide revenue" fines is that they change the calculus of launching

by returningfory2 2y ago

vanviegen 2y ago
Isn't that exactly the intended effect? Otherwise, why wouldn't BigCorp just ignore any inconvenient laws?
- returningfory2 2y ago
  I don't understand, are you saying the intended effect of these laws is that non-EU countries don't enter the EU market?
  - vanviegen 2y ago
    Not necessarily, but it should "change the calculus of launching an existing product in Europe", factoring in privacy laws. Either don't launch, or make sure that your product complies.
    - andersa 2y ago
      It isn't possible for an American company to actually comply.
      - max51 2y ago
        That's not a EU problem. If the US puts laws in place that prevents their company from expending overseas, that's a problem that Americans need to fix.
        andersa 2y ago
        There is nothing the companies can do about it.
        com 2y ago
        They can lobby, right? I mean what are those $billions being spent on? Weakening environmental or consumer protections?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - returningfory2 2y ago
      Yeah. But even if you act in good faith there's still a chance you'll make mistakes and run afoul of the law. And now the cost of a mistake is not "we'll end up losing money in this new market" it's "our business might fail worldwide".
  - max51 2y ago
    The intended effect is that they follow the law, it's really not that complicated. Why do people assume that US-based companies have this inalienable right to break any law they want in every country around the world and that we all have to cheer for them when they do it?