Comment by TZubiri
8 months ago
Also, the country (france) is ordering the "poisoning", these american companies just comply with local regulations.
Heavily biased article.
Remember that dns/ip systems are decentralized at the national precisely so that countries have sovereignity.
The editorial line would have us believe that france is committing a free speech crime or overturning internet infrastructure, while in actuality they are exherting their national rights.
This is literally just a framing issue. Note first that people generally believe in universal human rights, e.g. states shouldn't be allowed to do horrible things (e.g. genocide) just because they would be asserting their national rights.
Further the action of a single state often influences other states, as is especially true when it comes to the internet which is global by nature.
If you are comparing genocide with blocking pirating websites, I'm out
The example is there to establish the principle – once you accept that sovereignty has limitations it's then just a question of which limitations you think are legitimate and which aren't. I think censoring pirate websites kind of isn't.
It’s a slippery slope. Once you start losing rights, how low can you go? Historically, governments will go very low. A bad election (which is a real risk now in France) and there you have a facist state.
1 reply →