undefined | Better HN

0 pointspbhjpbhj7y ago0 comments

It seems a direct parallel of being tried for copyright infringement in USA when you have an offshore website - like O'Dwyer who had to bribe himself out of being extradited from UK to face charges of copyright infringement in USA. He'd never been there, didn't have servers there, and was acting legally in his jurisdiction of residence.

Similar things happened with USA's actions on Silk Road, KAT, with Kim Dotcom, and I'm sure many other legal situations I'm not aware of.

EU is seemingly extending logical contact to be equivalent to entry to a jurisdiction as USA appear to have established is desirable as a facet of inter-national application of law in the internet age.

I much prefer the extension of jurisdiction in protection of member states citizens rights than in the service of media conglomerates.

0 comments

dogma11387y ago

Copyright is enforced via local copyright holders / representatives, trade agreements and WTO rules AKA local or international law.

In no way shape or form does US law has a direct mandate outside of the US.

All the examples you've given were those of actions performed through established legal channels to which all parties had and have a saying in.

Extra-territorial application of the GDPR under existing frameworks (or the lack thereof) is tyrannical because you apply it to people that have had no saying in the establishment of the regulation and have no control over the interpretation and or the enforcement of it.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse