Hacker News Reader

Comment by pjc50 | Hacker News Reader

Global jurisdiction isn't great, but this is not its first appearance and global application of US copyright and patent law has been a problem for a while.

I suspect that without global jurisdiction we would end up with data laundering jurisdictions, just as we have tax laundering ones today.

View on HN

The US forces it laws on other countries by getting them to change their laws. If the EU wants to convince my country to change our laws then so be it, but why do I have to abide by a law that have I have no say in writing and have no way of changing it.

There are internationally signed agreements about punishing the companies and persons breaking other country laws. The USA has signed a lot of them with EU (for example) and it is in mutual interest to use them for both parties. Does it work? Decide for yourself: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/eu-announces-record-27-...

And GDPR is not about the laws. It is about crooked people breaking basic human rights for their profit, every normal person should be glad that he has a straight (well almost :) ) directions how to respect and show respect for his customers. The attitude of "you cant force me" is fundamentally wrong.

One more thing, as a non european cityzen, I would be carefully monitor what the sites are doing with basic human rights (as now it will become evident) and protect myself from those who show their disrespect by not using their sites, services etc. Whole world will profit from this legislation and you can bet a lot of other countries will adopt it.

Do you not see this is such a slippery slope? It is basically a "think of the children" justification. What happens when a country decides to imposes its laws on the EU and demand that data in the EU is removed or blocked that it doesn't like. The idea of the GDPR is good, it just is being implemented in a terrible way.

> What happens when a country decides to imposes its laws on the EU and demand that data in the EU is removed or blocked that it doesn't like.

I suspect that has happened before. The tool to resolve these disputes is called diplomacy.

Not much diplomacy going on with the EU, more "this is our law and we apply and we will fine you if you don’t follow".

You could geoblock the EU?

If we think of this as import/export it suddenly becomes more obvious - when importing or exporting physical goods from the EU, you have to follow EU law even if you're a non-national with no say in it.

(The example of US extraterritorialism I have is the other way round: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Elcom_Ltd. ; as it says there, "it involved an individual being prosecuted for activities that were fully legal in the country where they occurred")

IP and location have no legal relationship. They barely have actual relationship. I used UK vpn on google.com but it thinks I am from HK. If google cannot get a correct ipdb what chances do others have ?

And why would I block EU ? Connection is intiated by user. So its user importing/exporting data from/to server jurisdiction. Why does not EU force their own citizens to not do business with those companies ?

> Connection is intiated by user. So its user importing/exporting data from/to server jurisdiction

This line of reasoning didn't work for the poker companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Scheinberg

The US very definitely started the idea that it has global jurisdiction over the internet; why should it be the only such country?

You do know that two wrongs do not make a right.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com