|
|
|
|
|
|
by neya
3067 days ago
|
|
|
While I agree with most of what you said, where my perspective differs is this - The WWW is called the World Wide Web for a reason. A platform to showcase your service globally, without borders. Suddenly, the EU thinks "Oh, if you have a website that is accessible from the EU, then you need to display X". Sorry, then what was the point of WWW? And more important, why should I update my code? It costs me money and you're not paying me, obviously (you = GOV). Why don't you ask your citizens to stop visiting websites that track them? I showcase my service on a global platform. Don't like it? Don't visit it. |
|
|
I may remind you of the Megaupload case, where a German is under arrest in New Zealand for breaking US law by offering his site to American visitors.
The US has created the precedence for enforcing local law internationally during both the piracy enforcement cases, and the NSA cases.
As result, it is just expected that other countries will use this tool for their own purposes — in this case, the EU is using it even for ghe benefit of the people. Something you can't say about the use the US made of it.