6 ms·

Signal is headquartered in the US and presumably has no employees in Sweden (and perhaps the entire European Union). There is utterly nothing the Swedish gover

Signal is headquartered in the US and presumably has no employees in Sweden (and perhaps the entire European Union). There is utterly nothing the Swedish government can do to stop Signal except for pressuring app stores and/or ISP-level censorship. Preemptive surrender is extremely disappointing, especially for a non-profit - there isn’t even any revenue that can be ‘fined’ by the EU!

willvarfar 2y ago
The app stores are run by companies with a presence in the EU.
- walrus01 2y ago
  What's funny is that it's other EU laws from totally different parts of government which are, at the same time, pushing to allow for side loading of apps and alternate app stores on iOS and Android. https://www.google.com/search?q=apple%20eu%20alternative%20app%20store&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m https://www.google.com/search?q=apple%20eu%20alternative%20a... The end result of which, if done at large scale, means that an EU government couldn't ban signal, short of forcing all its domestic ISPs to be downstream of a China type great firewall, or simply null route all the IP space where signal's servers are located.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    All the alternative app stores can easily be subject to the same legal requirements as Apple. Side-loading is harder to enforce any rules over, of course. Blocking domains is well-established at this point, thanks to the copyright industry doing a 21.5-year whack-a-mole-waltz with The Pirate Bay. Of course, this also demonstrates the limited effectiveness of domain blocking.
    - walrus01 2y ago
      > Of course, this also demonstrates the limited effectiveness of domain blocking. Extremely limited effectiveness, when VPN operators like Mullvad are corporations based in Sweden and offer 5 euro a month service to bypass whatever local "mess with internet traffic" activity, whether government-caused or not, that someone's last mile ISP is up to... There's also the game of whack a mole with taking ownership of domains at the registrar/ICANN level through court orders, such as with the various .com or similar things that get jacked and plastered with a "DOMAIN HAS BEEN SEIZED" notice by the US feds.
- fulafel 2y ago
  You don't need to get Signal from an app store (unless you're on iOS I guess)
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    Even then the webapp should work
    - guerrilla 2y ago
      Since when is there a Signal web app? I don't think there is, but even if there were then presumably it'd work the same as the desktop app: "To use the Signal desktop app, Signal must first be installed on your phone."
  - miohtama 2y ago
    In the EU, Apple must support side loading and other app stores.
    - fulafel 2y ago
      But those are also vulnerable to these laws, no? App sideloading seems the only escape.
  - itishappy 2y ago
    For 99% of people the effect is the same as blocking the app.
    - fulafel 2y ago
      You mean because users don't know how to sideload? Maybe so far, as there's been no need. On Android it's just one pref and then you download the APK in the browser.
      - itishappy 2y ago
        Yeah, most people don't leave the easy path. Most people don't use Signal. Adding more friction won't improve that.
diggan 2y ago
I keep seeing this idea that because a company is headquartered in some place, means they don't have to follow the laws of the countries where they operate. Yes, Signal may be headquartered in the US, but that doesn't mean they can just ignore the laws of other countries, which is exactly what may happen here, depending on the outcome. Sweden may propose a backdoor (a utterly shitty idea, I agree) which Signal may decline (which this submission is about). Then the next step is either Sweden giving up on the request, or placing fines on Signal until they comply or outright ban it, or Signal deciding it isn't worth it (prevent Swedish users from using Signal). All within their capacities and rights, even though I again think it would very stupid approach.
- walrus01 2y ago
  > I keep seeing this idea that because a company is headquartered in some place, means they don't have to follow the laws of the countries where they operate. My friend's medium size regional ISP is headquartered in the US and as a hosting company certainly has customers who violate any number of censorship, blasphemy, etc laws in Iran, Russia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Bangladesh, just to name a few. Signal doesn't "operate" in Sweden any more or any less than any other internet based service which has zero servers, offices, bank accounts or other physical presence in the country.
- arcbyte 2y ago
  There are only a few instances where institutional powers pass judgements that they cannot enforce. Generally doing so makes that institution look weak because it puts them in a position to have their rulings openly flouted. That's at the core of what jurisdiction means. Sweden can fine Signal all they want but if they can't enforce the collection, they weaken their power and foster disrespect.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    Singal is centralized? Can't they just block it at the border? I understand VPN or whatever, but if they're serious I hear there's a couple of countries with "pretty good" border firewalls. Doing that would eliminate so many Swedes from Signal... I haven't found a VPN solution for iPhone users in a couple of US states. It's like iphones are actively hostile to the very idea of a VPN. Or at least "self-hosted VPN", maybe the $20/month VPN work but that's... Sketchy.
Aurornis 2y ago
> There is utterly nothing the Swedish government can do to stop Signal except for pressuring app stores and/or ISP-level censorship They can go after executives and employees of foreign companies, too. The charges may not mean much unless those employees travel through Sweden, but if the political winds change in the future then they may be able to convince other countries to enforce their charges against employees as well. It’s reasonable for a company to avoid risking their employees becoming targets of detention for international travel. It also more effectively highlights the political issue within Sweden if people there see the consequences of the laws of their elected officials rather than having those laws silently ignored by a company that takes the legal risk upon themselves.
FromOmelas 2y ago
Sweden is part of the expanded 5 eyes (now 14 eyes). As a workaround for restrictions on domestic spying, they subcontract their dirty work to each other. Hence, you can expect the US to assist in pressuring them (ostensibly on behalf of Sweden)

willvarfar 2y ago

The app stores are run by companies with a presence in the EU.

walrus01 2y ago
What's funny is that it's other EU laws from totally different parts of government which are, at the same time, pushing to allow for side loading of apps and alternate app stores on iOS and Android. https://www.google.com/search?q=apple%20eu%20alternative%20app%20store&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m https://www.google.com/search?q=apple%20eu%20alternative%20a... The end result of which, if done at large scale, means that an EU government couldn't ban signal, short of forcing all its domestic ISPs to be downstream of a China type great firewall, or simply null route all the IP space where signal's servers are located.
- ben_w 2y ago
  All the alternative app stores can easily be subject to the same legal requirements as Apple. Side-loading is harder to enforce any rules over, of course. Blocking domains is well-established at this point, thanks to the copyright industry doing a 21.5-year whack-a-mole-waltz with The Pirate Bay. Of course, this also demonstrates the limited effectiveness of domain blocking.
  - walrus01 2y ago
    > Of course, this also demonstrates the limited effectiveness of domain blocking. Extremely limited effectiveness, when VPN operators like Mullvad are corporations based in Sweden and offer 5 euro a month service to bypass whatever local "mess with internet traffic" activity, whether government-caused or not, that someone's last mile ISP is up to... There's also the game of whack a mole with taking ownership of domains at the registrar/ICANN level through court orders, such as with the various .com or similar things that get jacked and plastered with a "DOMAIN HAS BEEN SEIZED" notice by the US feds.
fulafel 2y ago
You don't need to get Signal from an app store (unless you're on iOS I guess)
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  Even then the webapp should work
  - guerrilla 2y ago
    Since when is there a Signal web app? I don't think there is, but even if there were then presumably it'd work the same as the desktop app: "To use the Signal desktop app, Signal must first be installed on your phone."
- miohtama 2y ago
  In the EU, Apple must support side loading and other app stores.
  - fulafel 2y ago
    But those are also vulnerable to these laws, no? App sideloading seems the only escape.
- itishappy 2y ago
  For 99% of people the effect is the same as blocking the app.
  - fulafel 2y ago
    You mean because users don't know how to sideload? Maybe so far, as there's been no need. On Android it's just one pref and then you download the APK in the browser.
    - itishappy 2y ago
      Yeah, most people don't leave the easy path. Most people don't use Signal. Adding more friction won't improve that.

diggan 2y ago

I keep seeing this idea that because a company is headquartered in some place, means they don't have to follow the laws of the countries where they operate. Yes, Signal may be headquartered in the US, but that doesn't mean they can just ignore the laws of other countries, which is exactly what may happen here, depending on the outcome. Sweden may propose a backdoor (a utterly shitty idea, I agree) which Signal may decline (which this submission is about). Then the next step is either Sweden giving up on the request, or placing fines on Signal until they comply or outright ban it, or Signal deciding it isn't worth it (prevent Swedish users from using Signal). All within their capacities and rights, even though I again think it would very stupid approach.

walrus01 2y ago
> I keep seeing this idea that because a company is headquartered in some place, means they don't have to follow the laws of the countries where they operate. My friend's medium size regional ISP is headquartered in the US and as a hosting company certainly has customers who violate any number of censorship, blasphemy, etc laws in Iran, Russia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Bangladesh, just to name a few. Signal doesn't "operate" in Sweden any more or any less than any other internet based service which has zero servers, offices, bank accounts or other physical presence in the country.
arcbyte 2y ago
There are only a few instances where institutional powers pass judgements that they cannot enforce. Generally doing so makes that institution look weak because it puts them in a position to have their rulings openly flouted. That's at the core of what jurisdiction means. Sweden can fine Signal all they want but if they can't enforce the collection, they weaken their power and foster disrespect.
- genewitch 2y ago
  Singal is centralized? Can't they just block it at the border? I understand VPN or whatever, but if they're serious I hear there's a couple of countries with "pretty good" border firewalls. Doing that would eliminate so many Swedes from Signal... I haven't found a VPN solution for iPhone users in a couple of US states. It's like iphones are actively hostile to the very idea of a VPN. Or at least "self-hosted VPN", maybe the $20/month VPN work but that's... Sketchy.

Aurornis 2y ago

> There is utterly nothing the Swedish government can do to stop Signal except for pressuring app stores and/or ISP-level censorship They can go after executives and employees of foreign companies, too. The charges may not mean much unless those employees travel through Sweden, but if the political winds change in the future then they may be able to convince other countries to enforce their charges against employees as well. It’s reasonable for a company to avoid risking their employees becoming targets of detention for international travel. It also more effectively highlights the political issue within Sweden if people there see the consequences of the laws of their elected officials rather than having those laws silently ignored by a company that takes the legal risk upon themselves.

FromOmelas 2y ago

Sweden is part of the expanded 5 eyes (now 14 eyes). As a workaround for restrictions on domestic spying, they subcontract their dirty work to each other. Hence, you can expect the US to assist in pressuring them (ostensibly on behalf of Sweden)