US companies should not be subject to extraterritoriality applied by non-US entities. If EU want to charge and / or change Big Tech, they should create their own digital companies in their sovereign tech eco-system which might be interconnected and interoperable with the US and China internets.
Dunedan · 1d ago
Companies always have a choice: Comply with local regulations or leave the market. Nobody is forcing US companies to offer their services in the EU.
raverbashing · 2d ago
I kinda agree but given the amount of extraterritorial regulation the US pushes on other countries that's just rich
hunglee2 · 2d ago
US is hegemon. It is not hypocrisy, it is hierarchy. If EU or anyone else does not like this, they should seek independence from US systems, or accept subservience.
raxxorraxor · 21h ago
And they don't even that. The newest stint of the commission of fools wants to require Googles app verification for their age check solution. All the while claiming to fight for digital sovereignty.
They are heavily overtaxed with the false problems they imposed on themselves.
spacedcowboy · 2d ago
If the laws in different jurisdictions are incompatible (for example with end-to-end encryption, which is either “end-to-end” or “not-end-to-end”) then the product offering that service will simply have to be different in the two jurisdictions.
I know that Apple, for example, has iCloud and iCloud-in-china. Seems like a pain to manage, but they could presumably offer iCloud-in-Europe and iCloud-in-UK (though the UK seem to have backed off with their demands now).
Where it becomes interesting is for interaction, if an EU person tries to (for example) use e2e-iMessage to a US person or vice-versa. With this decision, does the service simply disallow the message if the jurisdictions disagree on the definition of E2E ?
What about things like Gmail’s escrowed private keys in email ? Where the Gmail server owns the private keys (so the server can provide search etc. on encrypted email). This isn’t E2E by a strict definition, it’s only “almost” E2E and “almost: doesn’t cut it, but if the server can’t read the email, you lose a lot of Gmail functionality…
paradox460 · 2d ago
I work for a company that has over 50 different jurisdictional variants, deployed across a reasonably wide geographic range.
We basically just build the app as a superset of all possible features, and then configure each different jurisdiction with what they can and cannot support. Currently this is done by a bunch of Helm templates, but there are many other ways to do it
twobitshifter · 1d ago
I was surprised by the FTC taking a stand but then read the following:
“The Digital Services Act (DSA) is an EU regulation that aims to create a safer online environment by holding digital platforms accountable for illegal content and *disinformation*.”
They are heavily overtaxed with the false problems they imposed on themselves.
I know that Apple, for example, has iCloud and iCloud-in-china. Seems like a pain to manage, but they could presumably offer iCloud-in-Europe and iCloud-in-UK (though the UK seem to have backed off with their demands now).
Where it becomes interesting is for interaction, if an EU person tries to (for example) use e2e-iMessage to a US person or vice-versa. With this decision, does the service simply disallow the message if the jurisdictions disagree on the definition of E2E ?
What about things like Gmail’s escrowed private keys in email ? Where the Gmail server owns the private keys (so the server can provide search etc. on encrypted email). This isn’t E2E by a strict definition, it’s only “almost” E2E and “almost: doesn’t cut it, but if the server can’t read the email, you lose a lot of Gmail functionality…
We basically just build the app as a superset of all possible features, and then configure each different jurisdiction with what they can and cannot support. Currently this is done by a bunch of Helm templates, but there are many other ways to do it
“The Digital Services Act (DSA) is an EU regulation that aims to create a safer online environment by holding digital platforms accountable for illegal content and *disinformation*.”