undefined | Better HN

0 pointsHizonner4mo ago0 comments

> It's a matter of UK law and, I'd bet, many countries, that they have the sovereign right to legislate about matters in and outside their borders.

Basically all countries take that position legally. But there are norms and customs about how often you exercise it (as well as practical questions of power).

Extraterritorial regulation of Web sites is unfortunately in the process of being established as normal, but it's a bad norm. Not as bad as drone striking anybody who lights a cigarette in Paris (which could be made legal), but a bad norm nonetheless.

0 comments

umanwizard4mo ago

Interestingly, Ireland seems to be one of the few countries whose constitution explicitly limits the reach of its laws:

> It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution.

(Which means the territory of what is now called the Republic of Ireland, that is, explicitly excluding any claim to Northern Ireland in order to comply with the Good Friday agreement)

socalgal24mo ago

Some activists should start making lots of complaints demanding that country A’s government sites comply with government B’s laws. Maybe the laws will change to reflect reality when government A says to fuck off

1 more reply

HPsquared4mo ago

What happens if two foreign countries try to impose mutually exclusive laws?

londons_explore4mo ago

For many years, Google solved this by saying the laws of country X only applied in the country specific domain of Google.

They now seem to have backtracked on that and are using either the country the request came from or the country the account was set up from (both using IP geolocation)

Tuna-Fish4mo ago

If they both are able to enforce their laws on you, you get to choose which prison you go to.

conartist64mo ago

Then they kiss

hilbert424mo ago

"Extraterritorial regulation of Web sites is unfortunately in the process of being established as normal, but it's a bad norm."

Perhaps "Extraterritorial regulation" is bad wording. A country can regulate whether an extraterritorial website is distributed and or viewed within its borders but it has no legal authority force another country to close down a website that's operating legally within its jurisdiction.

The only remaining options are diplomatic action—request the site be taken down or war/by force. Whether we like it or not the only practical action is for a country to geoblock offensive websites at its borders.

Sadly, given the current state of world affairs, it seems to me geoblocking will become the norm almost everywhere.

AnthonyMouse4mo ago

> Perhaps "Extraterritorial regulation" is bad wording. A country can regulate whether an extraterritorial website is distributed and or viewed within its borders but it has no legal authority force another country to close down a website that's operating legally within its jurisdiction.

The issue is they're doing this through might makes right rather than jurisdictional authority.

You have a website in one country, 99% of the content is legal in another country but it also contains a post by a user which is legal in the first country and not the second.

The second country then demands that the website remove the post -- for everyone, they don't even want it accessible via VPN -- or they'll have their ISPs block not just the entire website but also the entire shared hosting provider the website uses. The site which is entirely in the other jurisdiction can't withstand that much pressure and removes the post.

You now have a country censoring a post world-wide because they leveraged every company within their jurisdiction to enforce a law against one that isn't. That's extraterritorial regulation.

exe344mo ago

> You now have a country censoring a post world-wide because they leveraged every company within their jurisdiction to enforce a law against one that isn't. That's extraterritorial regulation.

Hopefully this will break up the cartel of websites/distributors back into a decentralised web eventually.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

umanwizard4mo ago

Interestingly, Ireland seems to be one of the few countries whose constitution explicitly limits the reach of its laws:

(Which means the territory of what is now called the Republic of Ireland, that is, explicitly excluding any claim to Northern Ireland in order to comply with the Good Friday agreement)

socalgal24mo ago

1 more reply

HPsquared4mo ago

What happens if two foreign countries try to impose mutually exclusive laws?

londons_explore4mo ago

For many years, Google solved this by saying the laws of country X only applied in the country specific domain of Google.

They now seem to have backtracked on that and are using either the country the request came from or the country the account was set up from (both using IP geolocation)

Tuna-Fish4mo ago

If they both are able to enforce their laws on you, you get to choose which prison you go to.

conartist64mo ago

Then they kiss

hilbert424mo ago

"Extraterritorial regulation of Web sites is unfortunately in the process of being established as normal, but it's a bad norm."

Sadly, given the current state of world affairs, it seems to me geoblocking will become the norm almost everywhere.

AnthonyMouse4mo ago

The issue is they're doing this through might makes right rather than jurisdictional authority.

You have a website in one country, 99% of the content is legal in another country but it also contains a post by a user which is legal in the first country and not the second.

You now have a country censoring a post world-wide because they leveraged every company within their jurisdiction to enforce a law against one that isn't. That's extraterritorial regulation.

exe344mo ago

> You now have a country censoring a post world-wide because they leveraged every company within their jurisdiction to enforce a law against one that isn't. That's extraterritorial regulation.

Hopefully this will break up the cartel of websites/distributors back into a decentralised web eventually.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse