4 ms·

They could, but if the branch didn’t follow these laws, the main US branch would still be liable.

by cassianoleal 4mo ago

cromka 4mo ago
It's about time SOME entities start moving from US entirely.
- mikeyouse 4mo ago
  RISC-V Foundation did.. though they go out of their way to talk about it in terms that try not to piss anyone off.. > "Across 2018-2019, the RISC-V community has reflected on the geo-political landscape and we have heard concerns from around the world that investment in RISC-V must come with IP access continuity to ensure a long-term strategic investment. We first mentioned our intentions to move at the December 2018 summit. Incorporation in Switzerland has the effect of calming concerns of political disruption to the open collaboration model. RISC-V International does not maintain any commercial interest in products or services as a non-profit, membership organization. There have not been any export restrictions on RISC-V in the US and we have complied with all US laws. The move does not circumvent any existing restrictions, but rather alleviates uncertainty going forward. > In March 2020, the RISC-V International Association was incorporated in Switzerland. Along with this, we shifted to a new, more inclusive membership structure. Members of RISC-V International have access to and participate in the development of the RISC-V ISA specification and extensions as well as related hardware and software. RISC-V has a Board of Directors composed of member representatives as well as a Technical Committee of work group leaders." > RISC-V International has not incorporated in Switzerland based on any one country, company, government, or event. This move is reflective of community concern and managing strategic risk for our community investing in RISC-V for the next 50+ years. > The IP contributed and produced by RISC-V International is held under industry and global standard licenses that are already open to leverage by any company regardless of jurisdiction. This licensing is a common open source approach to foster collaboration that is not tied to any geographic regulation. IP in the public domain has not been subject to export control. https://riscv.org/about/ https://riscv.org/about/
  - pclmulqdq 4mo ago
    The RISC-V foundation and related companies also got a bunch of money from Europe. I am not so sure this was about leaving a repressive regime as much as chasing the European "homegrown computing" money.
    - mikeyouse 4mo ago
      I think a big part of it was the Chinese element as well - the RISC-V Swiss reorg happened at the end of the first Trump term when the US was making a lot of noise about banning Chinese investment in US companies and more greatly restricting IP - I'm sure their members were nervous about building a long-term plan with a lot of Chinese involvement.
- rafram 4mo ago
  Other countries sanction each other too.
  - cassianoleal 4mo ago
    This is not about countries sanctioning each other. This is the US sanctioning a local company because a foreign company doesn’t follow certain US laws in foreign soil, where such laws don’t apply. It’s a bit like the US arresting your mom at home in Texas because you ate a baggie of magic truffles in Amsterdam.
    - rafram 4mo ago
      You're being very vague. Please explain what you mean? I don't see anything here about the US "sanctioning a local company," and I'm not aware of that being possible under US law.
      - cromka 4mo ago
        "Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act."
      - cassianoleal 4mo ago
        Please see my answer to the sibling comment.
    - kube-system 4mo ago
      The way you are using these words seems to indicate you might be confused about how this works. The US has not "sanctioned" LetsEncrypt or ISRG. The US sanctions foreign entities as punishment for various reasons precisely because they are not subject to US law. That's the entire point of leveraging a sanction -- to pressure those outside of your legal jurisdiction. If they were in your jurisdiction, you'd simply arrest them. People and organizations basically anywhere not permitted to do business with anyone your country has sanctioned. Anyone who does business internationally should be aware of their country's sanctioned list. That applies no matter where you live on the planet.
- naturalmovement 4mo ago
  [flagged]
- Tangurena2 4mo ago
  This is part of why the EU is looking to move away from US-based infrastructure. The CLOUD Act basically lets Washington have an off-switch on your computing infrastructure as well as giving Washington unlimited access to any data on your computers (or that passes through them).
mfuzzey 4mo ago
Just close down completely in the US and move to the EU
- kube-system 4mo ago
  And then what? Be subject to similar sanctions from a different governing body? e.g. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-against-russia-explained/#services https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-agains...
- drstewart 4mo ago
  Why, so they can be forced to enforce content restrictions on any provider that wants an SSL restriction?
- nozzlegear 4mo ago
  So simple, just uproot your lives and move to a different continent 4heads!
trumpdong 4mo ago
What if the branch in Iran was the main branch?
skissane 4mo ago
It depends on the legal structure. If they set up a subsidiary in Europe, they could be held liable for actions of European subsidiary. If an independent org is stood up in Europe, with European directors, staff and funding, legally independent of US org, and the US org just provides advice/assistance to Europe org without ability to control it-legal liability for US org for Europe org’s decisions is less likely. Of course, ask a lawyer-but if you openly say “we are doing this to work around US sanctions” you could still be liable; if you say “this has nothing to do with sanctions this is about resilience of global digital infrastructure and European digital sovereignty” then under what legal theory is the US org liable?

They could, but if the branch didn’t follow these laws, the main US branch would still be liable.

cromka 4mo ago

It's about time SOME entities start moving from US entirely.

mikeyouse 4mo ago
RISC-V Foundation did.. though they go out of their way to talk about it in terms that try not to piss anyone off.. > "Across 2018-2019, the RISC-V community has reflected on the geo-political landscape and we have heard concerns from around the world that investment in RISC-V must come with IP access continuity to ensure a long-term strategic investment. We first mentioned our intentions to move at the December 2018 summit. Incorporation in Switzerland has the effect of calming concerns of political disruption to the open collaboration model. RISC-V International does not maintain any commercial interest in products or services as a non-profit, membership organization. There have not been any export restrictions on RISC-V in the US and we have complied with all US laws. The move does not circumvent any existing restrictions, but rather alleviates uncertainty going forward. > In March 2020, the RISC-V International Association was incorporated in Switzerland. Along with this, we shifted to a new, more inclusive membership structure. Members of RISC-V International have access to and participate in the development of the RISC-V ISA specification and extensions as well as related hardware and software. RISC-V has a Board of Directors composed of member representatives as well as a Technical Committee of work group leaders." > RISC-V International has not incorporated in Switzerland based on any one country, company, government, or event. This move is reflective of community concern and managing strategic risk for our community investing in RISC-V for the next 50+ years. > The IP contributed and produced by RISC-V International is held under industry and global standard licenses that are already open to leverage by any company regardless of jurisdiction. This licensing is a common open source approach to foster collaboration that is not tied to any geographic regulation. IP in the public domain has not been subject to export control. https://riscv.org/about/ https://riscv.org/about/
- pclmulqdq 4mo ago
  The RISC-V foundation and related companies also got a bunch of money from Europe. I am not so sure this was about leaving a repressive regime as much as chasing the European "homegrown computing" money.
  - mikeyouse 4mo ago
    I think a big part of it was the Chinese element as well - the RISC-V Swiss reorg happened at the end of the first Trump term when the US was making a lot of noise about banning Chinese investment in US companies and more greatly restricting IP - I'm sure their members were nervous about building a long-term plan with a lot of Chinese involvement.
rafram 4mo ago
Other countries sanction each other too.
- cassianoleal 4mo ago
  This is not about countries sanctioning each other. This is the US sanctioning a local company because a foreign company doesn’t follow certain US laws in foreign soil, where such laws don’t apply. It’s a bit like the US arresting your mom at home in Texas because you ate a baggie of magic truffles in Amsterdam.
  - rafram 4mo ago
    You're being very vague. Please explain what you mean? I don't see anything here about the US "sanctioning a local company," and I'm not aware of that being possible under US law.
    - cromka 4mo ago
      "Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act."
    - cassianoleal 4mo ago
      Please see my answer to the sibling comment.
  - kube-system 4mo ago
    The way you are using these words seems to indicate you might be confused about how this works. The US has not "sanctioned" LetsEncrypt or ISRG. The US sanctions foreign entities as punishment for various reasons precisely because they are not subject to US law. That's the entire point of leveraging a sanction -- to pressure those outside of your legal jurisdiction. If they were in your jurisdiction, you'd simply arrest them. People and organizations basically anywhere not permitted to do business with anyone your country has sanctioned. Anyone who does business internationally should be aware of their country's sanctioned list. That applies no matter where you live on the planet.
naturalmovement 4mo ago
[flagged]
Tangurena2 4mo ago
This is part of why the EU is looking to move away from US-based infrastructure. The CLOUD Act basically lets Washington have an off-switch on your computing infrastructure as well as giving Washington unlimited access to any data on your computers (or that passes through them).

mfuzzey 4mo ago

Just close down completely in the US and move to the EU

kube-system 4mo ago
And then what? Be subject to similar sanctions from a different governing body? e.g. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-against-russia-explained/#services https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-agains...
drstewart 4mo ago
Why, so they can be forced to enforce content restrictions on any provider that wants an SSL restriction?
nozzlegear 4mo ago
So simple, just uproot your lives and move to a different continent 4heads!

trumpdong 4mo ago

What if the branch in Iran was the main branch?

skissane 4mo ago

It depends on the legal structure. If they set up a subsidiary in Europe, they could be held liable for actions of European subsidiary. If an independent org is stood up in Europe, with European directors, staff and funding, legally independent of US org, and the US org just provides advice/assistance to Europe org without ability to control it-legal liability for US org for Europe org’s decisions is less likely. Of course, ask a lawyer-but if you openly say “we are doing this to work around US sanctions” you could still be liable; if you say “this has nothing to do with sanctions this is about resilience of global digital infrastructure and European digital sovereignty” then under what legal theory is the US org liable?