Comment by thewebguyd
7 months ago
But its still not the UK government's decision. They don't have sovereignty over other nations, as much as they'd like to think they do.
All they can legally do is bitch and moan and order UK ISPs to block. There's no action they can legally take against Imgur.
The US does exert its laws extraterritorially when there is a sufficient nexus to US interests too. Why wouldn't the UK be allowed to do so?
The US also has outsized influence in this arena due to the USD being the world reserve currency. Which isn't to say that might makes right, but it's easier to get your way when you can dictate the terms by which banks and nations can interface with the global economy. The British pound doesn't have quite the same level of soft power, so it must be wielded more strategically to avoid completely losing that which it still possesses.
I don't imagine going after Imgur would be a worthwhile exercise of that soft power.
The UK? How many divisions do they have?
Why shouldn’t Russia be allowed to exert their laws extraterritorially? Or Mali? Or Sudan? Or the Iranians? Or China? Or Israel?
What you’re asking for is the end of the internet, full stop.
They are! Russia has been fining Google increasingly insane amounts for blocking state media [1]. It's the company's prerogative of whether they want to have a legal entity falling under the country's jurisdiction and whether employees want to travel there and risk being held criminally liable.
It's likely simpler to just block access to the country's IP ranges (or ignore!) and move on.
[1]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxvnwkl5kgo
7 replies →
>There's no action they can legally take against Imgur.
This is a very, very dangerous game to play.
This is how employees of your business on vacation in the UK end up in jail.
> This is how employees of your business on vacation in the UK end up in jail.
I mean its not. Because this is data protection laws, the company is liable, not its employees. (https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re...)
Even in cases where a company causes death, or destruction and the company is found liable, employees are not allowed to be used as standins, employees need to be convicted as well. a conviction isn't fungible, that kinda the point of common law.
I mean yes, if you have a large well funded company that brings profit to said country that is how common law works.
In the US for example if you happen to bring gambling funds to some other country from us citizens you will be arrested in very creative ways while not even getting close to the US.
At the end of the day all law is what the government wants to do and can get away with. When it comes to not actual citizens of the country they tend to get away with a whole lot more. Or another more simple way to put it, "You can beat the wrap, but you can't beat the ride".
Imgur recently fired all of their employees, and no longer has any actual staff. No developers, no moderators, no IT guys.
An ongoing protest over the state of Imgur has been going on since the first of this month.
So, uh, _what_ employees on vacation?
So the company is owned by a mythical no one? Somewhere on a corporate charter there are names.
1 reply →