| ▲ | yorwba 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
> if any pair of countries have conflicting rules then you simply can't expose your service to both Yes. This is also how physical products work. The internet makes it easy and the default to offer a service worldwide, hence also making it easy to get in conflict with the law worldwide. You have to pick and choose which laws to break, which laws to comply with by minimizing exposure, and which laws to comply with by making a tailor-made version for a specific market. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | iamnothere 3 hours ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
You say this confidently, but this is merely one theory about how things should work. If I make a product in my country, where it’s legal, and a buyer purchases it from me and then brings it to you overseas where it’s illegal, and someone in your county tries to sue me for it, they are typically going to have a hard time. (Unless your country is powerful enough to violate the sovereignty of my nation.) In most cases, you accessing my website is more like this scenario. Intermediaries (ISPs) brought you the product. I simply offered it to anyone who came to my “store” (server). I admit that this dynamic changes if you directly pay me for something. Your framework implies that every social website needs to make a decision on whether or not users are allowed to insult the Thai monarch[0], and then must block access to Thais if they decide it’s allowed. In reality nobody does this, although they may choose not to put a server in Thailand if they are worried about it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A8se-majest%C3%A9_in_Thai... | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||