Comment by b112
5 months ago
No, not performative or token.
Blocking via geoip is a reasonable, best effort method in this case. It's doing a best effort to comply.
So not merely for performance without true compliance, or tokenism, which courts really frown upon.
>> judge in the area will feel that it was reasonably done
> No ... It's doing a best effort to comply
Generally when you repeat my statement back to me, you do so in agreement.
Except that your statement contains the words 'performative' and 'token', which are the opposite of 'best effort' in a court.
And this is my point.
I disagree that "performative" and "token" are the opposite of "best effort".
The opposite of "best effort" is clearly "worst effort".
You seem to take offense with the idea that the company is doing "the minimum viable legal requirement" and you insist that "no, by doing what the judge says, it's actually an earnest and good attempt!"
If you actually think a company puts in even 0.1% more effort than a court requires of them, then I think you are very naive. Clearly the company could prevent VPNs from working if they wanted to invest the effort, like Netflix and China do, but they literally can't be bothered if the court doesn't require it.
I consider "minimum viable legal requirement to get past the judge" to be "performative and token" because they do NOT actually care if users access it, they want them too, they are only checking a liability box forced on them by the court and their legal department, doing the literal minimum.
5 replies →