5 ms·

Why would you region block a webpage like this

by mcfedr 2y ago

safeimp 2y ago
Reading their terms, I'm guessing it's due to: > 3. Eligibility: The Challenge is open to legal residents of the United States. Entrants must be 18 years of age or older as of their date of entry. The Challenge is subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations and is void where prohibited by law. Employees and contractors of the MTA, its subsidiaries, affiliates, and directors (collectively the “Employees”), as well as members of an Employee’s immediate family and/or those living in the same household, are ineligible to participate in the Challenge.
- ratedgene 2y ago
  yeah but wouldn't you want to create enough buzz globally so word of mouth can spread to more US entrants?
  - safeimp 2y ago
    I don't disagree with you at all, I'm just speculating over why they'd block it.
- n_plus_1_acc 2y ago
  You can be a resident of the US and be on vacation for a couple weeks
nemo44x 2y ago
Because the next thing you know the EU is suing you for billions of Euros.
- cddotdotslash 2y ago
  Expect to see more of this, especially when the audience is local/US. IIRC, some newspapers are already doing region blocks. Why should website owners targeting US visitors spend _any_ amount of money making their content comply with asinine regulations (like cookie banners)?
  - cinntaile 2y ago
    Cookie banners are not a regulation requirement. Contrary to what you seem to believe...There were more geoblocks when the EU law went into action a couple of years ago. There are less now.
    - kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
      EU cookie directive predates GDPR. Notices have long been required by that regulation for use of non-essential cookies.
    - cddotdotslash 2y ago
      > There were more geoblocks when the EU law went into action a couple of years ago. There are less now. Source for that?
      - cinntaile 2y ago
        My personal experience.
- deathanatos 2y ago
  "Doctor it hurts…", IANAL. I mean … as I understand the Europeans' law, only if you're doing dumb things to begin with, like giving users' data away to random 3rd parties hellbent on shoving "ads" down one's throat. If you had just made this site a simple HTML page that just had the information the MTA wanted to convey on it, AIUI the EU doesn't have a problem. Which … the MTA does appear to be, sending requests to Google, LinkedIn, and some other CDNs. I also don't think the MTA has any EU presence, so what are they going to do?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > as I understand the Europeans' law, only if you're doing dumb things to begin with, like giving users' data away to random 3rd parties hellbent on shoving "ads" down one's throat There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > don't think the MTA has any EU presence, so what are they going to do? Send letters. The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, which means legal bills.
    - deathanatos 2y ago
      > There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, which means legal bills. …why would the MTA be obligated to respond to them? They've no jurisdiction/sovereignty over an American transit agency. Why would they audit themselves against laws that don't apply to them? (Again, jurisdiction?) I've never worked for a company that audited itself against every law from every nation on Earth; we complied with the laws where we had a presence and did business.
  - returningfory2 2y ago
    > ...AIUI the EU doesn't have a problem We're talking about a US transit agency. Even thinking about whether the EU has a problem with the agency's website is sort of absurd to begin with.
    - warkdarrior 2y ago
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Why would you region block a webpage like this As a part-time New York City taxpayer, I'd rather we not be paying EU lawyers to make sure the MTA's open data complies with European law.
- pc86 2y ago
  Good news, the EU doesn't have any jurisdiction in NYC (or anywhere else outside of the EU) so they don't have the ability to enforce anything outside of their borders, as much as they would like you to believe otherwise. You can enforce what people and companies do within your borders. You cannot enforce what companies or people outside of your borders do.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - alwa 2y ago
    That may come as news to sanctioned Russians and various motley crypto types… Isn’t the GDPR’s basic theory about jurisdiction that, if I’m sitting in New York City but routinely serving my web content to people in France, that service I’m providing relies on browsing intentions and tracking functions being executed by a user and on a machine in France, and therefore the meat of the “wrongdoing” is happening within their borders? You can choose to do that the European way or not at all. And the local contests division of the NYC local transit authority is choosing “not at all.” Isn’t this then a case of NYC complying with the EU’s express wishes for privacy by not “exporting” code they don’t want there?
    - pc86 2y ago
      Aren't most sanctions due to e.g. the US making it illegal for banks with a US presence to do business with sanctioned states/people? I don't think the US is telling some Polish bank that only operates in Poland and Russia that they need to stop doing business Russia, although they may sanction that bank as well if they don't. I have no problem with voluntarily complying to GDPR-style privacy regulations because it's the right thing to do. Where I am able to make the decision, we store basically no user data beyond what's required to do whatever the user is trying to do. My problem is the EU pretending that US companies must be fully GDPR-compliant because someone in France chooses to go to their website. At the end of the day, laws are only laws because you can enforce them. If I had a magic wand and could rob a bank but the police for some reason were unable to arrest me, the fact that bank robbery is illegal is merely semantic at that point. If I chose to flaunt GDPR non-compliance on a US-based website the EU would be impotent to do anything other than block the site, which wouldn't make me any more likely to suddenly become GDPR compliant. It's a fiction and I probably wouldn't care about it nearly as much except it has essentially ruined the public internet with cookie banners everywhere. Every time a cookie banner gets displayed on some non-EU resident's personal blog, a puppy dies.
kassner 2y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20240927144204/https://new.mta.info/article/mta-open-data-challenge https://web.archive.org/web/20240927144204/https://new.mta.i... I can access it just fine from Sweden :shrug:

Why would you region block a webpage like this

by mcfedr 2y ago

Why would you region block a webpage like this

Reading their terms, I'm guessing it's due to: > 3. Eligibility: The Challenge is open to legal residents of the United States. Entrants must be 18 years of age or older as of their date of entry. The Challenge is subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations and is void where prohibited by law. Employees and contractors of the MTA, its subsidiaries, affiliates, and directors (collectively the “Employees”), as well as members of an Employee’s immediate family and/or those living in the same household, are ineligible to participate in the Challenge.

ratedgene 2y ago
yeah but wouldn't you want to create enough buzz globally so word of mouth can spread to more US entrants?
- safeimp 2y ago
  I don't disagree with you at all, I'm just speculating over why they'd block it.
n_plus_1_acc 2y ago
You can be a resident of the US and be on vacation for a couple weeks

nemo44x 2y ago

Because the next thing you know the EU is suing you for billions of Euros.

cddotdotslash 2y ago
Expect to see more of this, especially when the audience is local/US. IIRC, some newspapers are already doing region blocks. Why should website owners targeting US visitors spend _any_ amount of money making their content comply with asinine regulations (like cookie banners)?
- cinntaile 2y ago
  Cookie banners are not a regulation requirement. Contrary to what you seem to believe...There were more geoblocks when the EU law went into action a couple of years ago. There are less now.
  - kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
    EU cookie directive predates GDPR. Notices have long been required by that regulation for use of non-essential cookies.
  - cddotdotslash 2y ago
    > There were more geoblocks when the EU law went into action a couple of years ago. There are less now. Source for that?
    - cinntaile 2y ago
      My personal experience.
deathanatos 2y ago
"Doctor it hurts…", IANAL. I mean … as I understand the Europeans' law, only if you're doing dumb things to begin with, like giving users' data away to random 3rd parties hellbent on shoving "ads" down one's throat. If you had just made this site a simple HTML page that just had the information the MTA wanted to convey on it, AIUI the EU doesn't have a problem. Which … the MTA does appear to be, sending requests to Google, LinkedIn, and some other CDNs. I also don't think the MTA has any EU presence, so what are they going to do?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > as I understand the Europeans' law, only if you're doing dumb things to begin with, like giving users' data away to random 3rd parties hellbent on shoving "ads" down one's throat There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > don't think the MTA has any EU presence, so what are they going to do? Send letters. The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, which means legal bills.
  - deathanatos 2y ago
    > There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, which means legal bills. …why would the MTA be obligated to respond to them? They've no jurisdiction/sovereignty over an American transit agency. Why would they audit themselves against laws that don't apply to them? (Again, jurisdiction?) I've never worked for a company that audited itself against every law from every nation on Earth; we complied with the laws where we had a presence and did business.
- returningfory2 2y ago
  > ...AIUI the EU doesn't have a problem We're talking about a US transit agency. Even thinking about whether the EU has a problem with the agency's website is sort of absurd to begin with.
  - warkdarrior 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Why would you region block a webpage like this As a part-time New York City taxpayer, I'd rather we not be paying EU lawyers to make sure the MTA's open data complies with European law.

pc86 2y ago
Good news, the EU doesn't have any jurisdiction in NYC (or anywhere else outside of the EU) so they don't have the ability to enforce anything outside of their borders, as much as they would like you to believe otherwise. You can enforce what people and companies do within your borders. You cannot enforce what companies or people outside of your borders do.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- alwa 2y ago
  That may come as news to sanctioned Russians and various motley crypto types… Isn’t the GDPR’s basic theory about jurisdiction that, if I’m sitting in New York City but routinely serving my web content to people in France, that service I’m providing relies on browsing intentions and tracking functions being executed by a user and on a machine in France, and therefore the meat of the “wrongdoing” is happening within their borders? You can choose to do that the European way or not at all. And the local contests division of the NYC local transit authority is choosing “not at all.” Isn’t this then a case of NYC complying with the EU’s express wishes for privacy by not “exporting” code they don’t want there?
  - pc86 2y ago
    Aren't most sanctions due to e.g. the US making it illegal for banks with a US presence to do business with sanctioned states/people? I don't think the US is telling some Polish bank that only operates in Poland and Russia that they need to stop doing business Russia, although they may sanction that bank as well if they don't. I have no problem with voluntarily complying to GDPR-style privacy regulations because it's the right thing to do. Where I am able to make the decision, we store basically no user data beyond what's required to do whatever the user is trying to do. My problem is the EU pretending that US companies must be fully GDPR-compliant because someone in France chooses to go to their website. At the end of the day, laws are only laws because you can enforce them. If I had a magic wand and could rob a bank but the police for some reason were unable to arrest me, the fact that bank robbery is illegal is merely semantic at that point. If I chose to flaunt GDPR non-compliance on a US-based website the EU would be impotent to do anything other than block the site, which wouldn't make me any more likely to suddenly become GDPR compliant. It's a fiction and I probably wouldn't care about it nearly as much except it has essentially ruined the public internet with cookie banners everywhere. Every time a cookie banner gets displayed on some non-EU resident's personal blog, a puppy dies.

kassner 2y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20240927144204/https://new.mta.info/article/mta-open-data-challenge https://web.archive.org/web/20240927144204/https://new.mta.i... I can access it just fine from Sweden :shrug: