Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Regarding the retailer example: Suppose they have been selling counterfeit products and a Canadian court orders them to remove the product from all their stores. It would be completely justified in requiring this to happen worldwide. Allowing a modification of the order if it conflicts with law in other jurisdictions is just being generous.

However, the only consequences that can be imposed for failing to follow the order relate to doing business in Canada. Any corporation has to decide for themselves whether complying with the local law, even if it requires action somewhere else, is worth it for them.

It is in fact quite common for countries to leverage their local power into effecting a worldwide result. E.g. the US embargo on Iran cut off anyone doing business there from access to US financial institutions, and almost nobody wanted to risk that.



I don't think affecting a worldwide result using laws affecting companies based on your country is the same thing.

However I am curious, do you know of any example where a country ordered a company not based in their country to change something for other countries including the country they were based in? Surely there are sweatshop or other working condition examples, I just can't find any where the changes were required to apply for operation in other countries too. I suppose it would be like your answer to my hypothetical, I'm just curious if it has ever happened.

> It would be completely justified in requiring this to happen worldwide

I disagree if the company isn't based there (assuming by justification you meant to us as humans as opposed to legal justification).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: