UAE introduces federal law banning the use of VPNs to access blocked services
ibtimes.co.uk
ibtimes.co.uk
The actual law reads:
>“Whoever uses a fraudulent computer network protocol address (IP address) by using a false address or a third-party address by any other means for the purpose of committing a crime or preventing its discovery, shall be punished by temporary imprisonment and a fine of no less than Dhs 500,000 and not exceeding Dhs 2,000,000, or either of these two penalties.”
Key point being "for the purpose of committing a crime or preventing its discovery". It's a way to throw the book at people already committing crimes. Rather than being outraged at this, it would be more appropriate to focus on the things that are crimes and should not be, like their moronic VoIP laws.
For instance, a woman getting raped is defined as "extramarital sex" which is a crime.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/26/hundreds-of-wo...
He literally ended his comment with that point. You're not adding anything here.
> it would be more appropriate to focus on the things that are crimes and should not be, like their moronic VoIP laws.
Anyway, I think we can all agree that throwing the book at people for bullshit crimes and the bullshit crimes themselves are both bullshit.
For instance, posting vacation photos on Facebook. If you don't get permission from someone in a photo, even in a public space, it's illegal in the UAE. And if you were posting to Facebook through a VPN, stack on an extra half million dollars.
That part was previously covered under this law, with the new additions being to cover VOIP and other blocked services. Regardless of the recent changes, the UAE is awfully far down on the list of places I'd ever consider traveling.
Next time you go see a doctor for a throat rash are you going to get colonoscopy too?
A good discussion here on same topic: https://www.quora.com/Is-using-a-VPN-in-the-UAE-illegal
UAE is not USA where anyone can use/say/do anything by anyway they like. It is a sovereign state, a monarchy. She welcomes people to live there in a very healthy and free lifestyle as long as you dont step out of your bounds. Trouble makers are going to find troubles to make even they live on an isolated island. I hope UAE govt come through and make an official elaborated statement that VPN usage for business/work related purpose is not discouraged.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic with that statement...
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern...
Are you absolutely sure they are that unrelated?
Anyway, my point was that some of the things classified as "crimes" -- more explicitly, sexual offences -- in UAE are just a vile miscarriage of actual justice. Therefore, just referring to something not being a problem because it's "throwing the book at people already committing crimes" is not that good.
I don't know if people misread my comment because I did not elaborate too much about the case I linked. The problem is not that a sexual offence is a crime in UAE. The problem is that when a group of men rapes a woman in UAE, it is a sexual offence committed by that woman when she makes the mistake of reporting it to authorities. I find that approach reprehensible. Yes, I know I'm applying my own Western norms to other people. When visiting places like UAE, I of course respect the local practices to avoid committing offences there, but I still do think some of their ideas of sexual offences what are backwards, reactionary and reprehensible.
What you say about UAE as a sovereign state is of course quite true: She welcomes people to live there in a very healthy and free lifestyle as long as you dont step out of your bounds.
The same could be said about any country, every repressive dictatorship. Life is fine as long as you don't step out of your "bounds". The "bounds" in UAE are less unreasonable than in DPRK, for instance, but I consider some of them still problematic. As such, this statement "throwing the book at people already committing crimes" is not really saying anything. The VPN rules just add to the injury of having some very, very unreasonable laws.
(UAE is not USA, and I'm not from USA, either, so perhaps you are now making too many assumptions.)
If they only outlawed things that deserved to be criminalized, like theft or fraud, would the VPN surcharge still be a problem? Contrast with the scenario where VPN usage does not increase your 1 million Dh fine for using Skype to 3 million.
UAE like many other countries in that region have left a breadcrumb of problems behind them. In order to fit in to global fraternity they have to make drastic changes. Changes that cannot be made overnight. For example they recently introduced a law about fining employers who withhold paychecks for more than ten days etc. Neither I am an Emirati or live in that region. LIke many, I would simply get affected as a frequent traveler if such ban becomes a harsh reality.
In a monarchy simply decriminalizing something can happen with the stoke of a pen. There's no roadblock other than a lack of desire.
It would be interesting to know how this law is really enforced - it could range from legitimate and fair to very authoritarian.
(Note: I've heard the laws in the UAE can be strict, but I have no idea if this is factual.)
If you'd finished reading his comment, you'd have come across this sentence:
"Rather than being outraged at this, it would be more appropriate to focus on the things that are crimes and should not be".
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12176837 is another HN thread that is highly relevant. 2 + 2 = UAE wants national MITM enforcement techniques and do not want VPNs ruining it.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/03/extra-jail-time-f...
The rationale and legal posture of the proposal were different from this legislation, but the consequence would have been that people who used a proxy or VPN in the course of committing a Federal crime would be punished more harshly. The proposal was ultimately rejected.
This move directly supports monopolization of the market for VPNs.
VAE are far from perfect and I know it. Compared to many other countries in the region, it feels like pure "freedom" to be there. I found the residents to be relatively open minded. And their respected leader, while an absolut monarch, has the problem he has to rule a country that has a heterogenous population that is partly ultra-modern and ultra-conservative and he does a quite good job (compared to other countries in the region, again). For example, drinking alcohol is allowed at home and in hotels, but it is strictly forbidden in public. If he ruled in favor of total freedom, the conservatives would complain. If he ruled in Saudi-style, the 80% foreigners and Tourists would stay away.
For family reasons, business reasons, tax reasons and weather reasons, I have some appreciation for UAE. But I absolutely need open internet and will not accept anything else.
That's not a counter argument, it's a fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes. It's also an argumentative tactic that means that no country can ever be criticized for what it's doing because the country of the person doing the criticizing will always be doing something worthy of criticism as well.
It's also intellectually and morally bankrupt to compare a country's treatment of more than 50% of its population (women + the foreign laborers that outnumber Emirati citizens) with a country's treatment of a few hundred people captured on foreign battlefields.
That's not a counter argument, it's the same kind of argument against a different country
"I have never seen anybody on HN even remotely suggest that you shouldn't live in or move to the USA because of their bad human rights record (on the contrary, the USA is generally portrait in a very positive light), so why should human rights violations in the UAE prevent me from living there"
EDIT: My google fu is weak, and I'm not coming up with anything at the moment. I have found discussions about people avoiding transit through the US, but not about avoiding the US as a destination.