901–910 of 936 posts
People here seem to be thinking this a UK/Europe-specific phenomenon, but there's plenty of examples of the US "seizing" sites that were never hosted in the USA either, and even put pressure on countries to extradite people involved even if they never broke any laws in the country they're living in. One I remember was a site hosting streams of the 2022 football world cup. Or a number of Iranian-affiliated news sites…
The response from Ofcom doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. If you are to sell a toy in the UK you must be a British company. (and must pay VAT and comply with British safety standards). If a consumer buys from overseas and imports a product then they do not have British consumer protections. Which is why so much aliexpress electrical stuff is dangerous (expecially USB chargers) yet it continues to be legally imported. Jus…
That’s not really true. The Ofcom representative said “not allowed” not “unable to”. Even if cocaine is legal in my country, I’m “not allowed” to sell it to British consumers by the power of the British authorities. The British authorities may not have legal authority in my jurisdiction but they can take action in their own, including issuing penalties and stopping my deliveries at the border.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're serving US customers. You are doing business in the US, and therefore you are subject to US law I don't think this is how the law works. Think of it this way: any customer from Libya makes it customary for my female co-workers to wear hijab at the workplace. Thus a customer who voluntarily purchases services from a company in a different jurisdiction does NOT automatically makes this company subject to his j…
It certainly does automatically make you subject to that jurisdiction if you want to continue to do business there smoothly. Consider compliance with European laws by American tech companies. Sure, Apple loves counter-suing the EC over the DMA, but that's very much participating in the legal system and thus being "subject". And when they lose all their appeals, they pay the fine, because otherwise they would be force…
It doesn't. Laws only apply to a certain territory.
So if Libya doesn't like the way I provide services to their citizens they can impose any laws they want but these laws only work on their own sovereignty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the first time I see comments similar to this and I honestly can't even begin to grasp how anyone can think that the US is in any way shape or form at risk from Iran .
If it spends enough to trigger the debt bomb literally pounding sand, that could do it. It isn't Iran that is the danger though. The US could just walk away any time and be fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it correct to say the consumer is importing a product when it's aliexpress shipping it to them?
Of course. What situation are you imagining where a country imports a product without the seller shipping the product to that country?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Ofcom is probably full of non technical people who have been given a specific set of (stupid) instructions including that if its on the internet, its a product being sold to the UK.
I mean yeah when you're paing 20-40k£ you're not getting the best
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really when you were holding up causing suicide as why it's bad when every high traffic social network has done that.
yes, you are repeating the "what about" part. my comment has literally nothing to do with other social networks. if it helps, feel free to apply the original quote to facebook or whatever when they do something good. but this article and comment chain is about 4chan. so i am talking about 4chan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s pretty damned hard to completely secure any area from a potential attack when all one side needs is a drone. That’s a pretty specific high bar when we’ve destroyed most of their navy, Air Force, etc, all within a couple of weeks.
> It’s pretty damned hard to completely secure any area from a potential attack when all one side needs is a drone. Man, maybe the US should have had a contingency plan to address the drone issue before launching an unprovoked attack. > That’s a pretty specific high bar It's the bar that matters.