Who is out there saying this? That’s ridiculous. Are foreign people exempt from our laws when they visit? No? Then why would you believe foreign companies are exempt?
What laws? We literally just passed a law to ban them. There wasn’t any law they were breaking before. This is the corporate version of Congress passing a bill to send you to prison.
Saying this is the only regulation possible is breathtakingly ridiculous.
Funny how you had replied to a comment from me in another discussion explaining what that meant and now you’re acting like you had never seen that comment.
When I ask that question I’m looking for a source point. Usually when multiple people show up on social media claiming something like this it means some podcaster somewhere put it out there.
TikTok app merely being operational in the US is not presence. Implying that would be as ridiculous as giving a country jurisdiction over you becaues you sent a letter there.
It absolutely is presence. Otherwise the Brazilians couldn’t deal with X either. This is far more than sending a letter. And pretending we have no jurisdiction over companies operating in our country is ridiculous.
Any real arguments for falling under jurisdiction for sending network packets? Does it have to be a company, or do you also have to abide by jurisdiction of the country I’m in? My server is in? Your server is in?
This is purely your fantasy and nothing more. Not only websites send data to countries their operators never heard of, physical goods get shipped overseas to countries senders never heard of with zero randomland lawabidery happening. Actual deranged countries like mine are fucking furious about it, writing laws that would’ve forced companies to open regional departments so that they have something to grab by the balls. Since said laws have zero jurisdiction on said companies, the most the country can do about it is cry and block the traffic.
Google was a notable exception, opening a department to manage Google cache servers physically scattered around the country. Google has since left. Google has then been fined for several undecillion dollars, a number exceeding world GDP. Google, of course, doesn’t give a flying fuck.
So, don’t be as pathetic as my country. If you aren’t under X country jurisdiction, no amount of “pretty settled laws” apply to you, so you don’t have to abide by anything X wishes, claims or misleads you about. Sending virtual data or physical goods there doesn’t count either.
Of course blocking is the last resort and why countries like Iran block websites. Nobody was saying it isn’t the last resort. Your country being a limp noodle about it’s Internet doesn’t mean impossible though or even the norm. It has the Jurisdiction to enforce rules.
Who is out there saying this? That’s ridiculous. Are foreign people exempt from our laws when they visit? No? Then why would you believe foreign companies are exempt?
So what keeps them to obey US laws?
Ok, let me ask a different question. What can be done when a product from a foreign country doesn’t obey laws? Hint, it is happening on Sunday.
What laws? We literally just passed a law to ban them. There wasn’t any law they were breaking before. This is the corporate version of Congress passing a bill to send you to prison.
Saying this is the only regulation possible is breathtakingly ridiculous.
Funny how you had replied to a comment from me in another discussion explaining what that meant and now you’re acting like you had never seen that comment.
When I ask that question I’m looking for a source point. Usually when multiple people show up on social media claiming something like this it means some podcaster somewhere put it out there.
Because they don’t visit.
You’re right they’re just here. But that presence triggers jurisdiction.
TikTok app merely being operational in the US is not presence. Implying that would be as ridiculous as giving a country jurisdiction over you becaues you sent a letter there.
It absolutely is presence. Otherwise the Brazilians couldn’t deal with X either. This is far more than sending a letter. And pretending we have no jurisdiction over companies operating in our country is ridiculous.
Any real arguments for falling under jurisdiction for sending network packets? Does it have to be a company, or do you also have to abide by jurisdiction of the country I’m in? My server is in? Your server is in?
This isn’t a joke. This is pretty settled law. If you’re offering services in a country you must abide by their laws.
This is purely your fantasy and nothing more. Not only websites send data to countries their operators never heard of, physical goods get shipped overseas to countries senders never heard of with zero randomland lawabidery happening. Actual deranged countries like mine are fucking furious about it, writing laws that would’ve forced companies to open regional departments so that they have something to grab by the balls. Since said laws have zero jurisdiction on said companies, the most the country can do about it is cry and block the traffic.
Google was a notable exception, opening a department to manage Google cache servers physically scattered around the country. Google has since left. Google has then been fined for several undecillion dollars, a number exceeding world GDP. Google, of course, doesn’t give a flying fuck.
So, don’t be as pathetic as my country. If you aren’t under X country jurisdiction, no amount of “pretty settled laws” apply to you, so you don’t have to abide by anything X wishes, claims or misleads you about. Sending virtual data or physical goods there doesn’t count either.
Of course blocking is the last resort and why countries like Iran block websites. Nobody was saying it isn’t the last resort. Your country being a limp noodle about it’s Internet doesn’t mean impossible though or even the norm. It has the Jurisdiction to enforce rules.