| ▲ | rconti 5 hours ago |
| > "Companies – wherever they're based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the UK. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different," she said. So the UK plans to fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to British under-18s in France on holiday? |
|
| ▲ | Aloisius 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I'm not sure one needs to stretch the analogy this far. If someone from the UK calls me on the phone and I start reading them posts on 4chan, is the UK going to fine me too? |
| |
|
| ▲ | ceejayoz 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is more like the UK fining Parisian bars that courier alcohol to under-18s in the UK. |
| |
| ▲ | strideashort 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not exactly. It’s like fining Parisian bars to hand over alcohol to couriers without checking to whom couriers will deliver it. Couriers = all involved network providers. | |
| ▲ | tsukikage 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | More like the UK fining US porn publishers for not stopping British kids searching through the hedges in their street | | | |
| ▲ | shrubble 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s a lot more like banning the importation of books and newspapers that the government doesn’t agree with… | |
| ▲ | shaky-carrousel 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Which is equally absurd. | | |
| ▲ | OJFord 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | No it isn't? Real example is Amazon, a US company that sells alcohol in the UK, and is required to check age on order & delivery. | | |
| ▲ | qup 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Amazon is an international corporation with UK-incorporated entities. | | |
| ▲ | OJFord 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's true but not relevant to the spirit of the point. | | |
| ▲ | ronsor 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is relevant. There's a material difference between shipping material overseas and shipping it (and handling it) within the destination country. If someone mails $ProhibitedItem at a USPS to the UK, then it's the job of local UK police and/or customs to reject the parcel if it is prohibited. It's the UK's problem, de facto if not de jure, because the sender is out of reach. If someone with a UK subsidiary and local processing center mails $ProhibitedItem to their center and delivers it to someone in the UK, then that's more than the UK's problem. | | |
| ▲ | jimnotgym an hour ago | parent [-] | | And on an electronic delivery, is a great firewall the equivalent of customs? And therfore the only way to enforce sovereignty? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | OJFord 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In theory the children are committing a crime yes, but obviously enforcement is extremely low; left mainly to their teachers. I don't think UK law governs foreign companies' overseas operations based on the nationality of the customer though, no. |
| |
| ▲ | dijit 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They’re not breaking any law. Laws apply to actions in the country, they’re not based on citizenship. If you go to Amsterdam and sleep with a hooker, you didn’t break a law by doing that: despite prostitution (specifically purchasing sex) being illegal in many western countries. | | |
| ▲ | jltsiren an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Laws apply to whatever they say they apply to. Limiting their scope to actions in the country, or at least giving precedence to similar foreign laws, is at least as much about the practicalities of enforcement as a matter of principle. For example, Finland claims jurisdiction over crimes where the action itself or its relevant consequences happen in Finland or the victim is a Finnish citizen, permanent resident, or legal entity. Then there are plenty of rules and exceptions detailing what those principles mean in practice. | |
| ▲ | cjbgkagh 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That’s not always true, and increasingly less so, particularly the Australians and the crime of child sex tourism. I am sure it’ll be expanded to hate crimes and disturbing the peace laws as well and from there used as a political cudgel to suppress opposition to government policies. At least for now you have to be a citizen of the country but the UK has stated an intention to extradite US citizens for online hate crimes. | | | |
| ▲ | OJFord 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Commonwealth countries have extraterritorial jurisdiction. I don't know that it's ever been enforced for something so relatively petty as intoxication or prostitution, but it is nevertheless the law. (Obligatory IANAL though.) | |
| ▲ | dec0dedab0de 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Countries do have laws that apply even when you leave the country. For example, Americans living abroad still have to pay taxes. | | |
| ▲ | maxlybbert an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | The US can be very creative about when its jurisdiction applies ( https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/94-166 ). Manuel Noriega and “el Chapo” Guzman were both convicted of crimes they committed outside the US but that caused other people to commit crimes inside the US. Traveling to countries for child sex abuse is illegal and severely punished, although it appears that the law is about the traveling with intent, and not (officially) about the actions that take place overseas: https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-ceos/extraterritor... . | |
| ▲ | dijit 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Extraterritorial taxation is extremely rare; and its less of a law and more of a “cost of citizenship” since you’re allowed to get rid of it. |
| |
| ▲ | pearlsontheroad 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | afaik, prostitution is either legal or partially legal on the majority of Western countries. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries... | | |
| ▲ | dijit 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Normally its considered legal to sell but not legal to buy. Prostitution is primarily conducted by women, and this is a way for them to still seek protection and healthcare while still technically criminalising the practice. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | themafia an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They should arrange a book burning too. Since they seem to believe that foreign words are inherently dangerous. |
|
| ▲ | rjsw 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| France can fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to under-18s itself. |
