[Chapter-delegates] Digital sovreignty and splinternet

[Ted Hardie]

Hi Richard,

I was responding to your analogy with an analogy.  Sorry that wasn't clear.

Ted Hardie

On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 6:31 PM Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

> Dear Ted,
>
>
>
> We seem to be talking at cross-purposes. I was not referring to any
> specific digital sovereignty rules, but rather to the general principle
> that offline law applies equally online.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure which specific digital sovereignty rules you are referring
> to. Can you please point to the rules that would mandate provision of
> customer support locally?
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> *From:* Ted Hardie [mailto:ted.ietf at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, 27 May 2022 19:20
> *To:* Richard Hill
> *Cc:* Vittorio Bertola; ISOC Chapters
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Digital sovreignty and splinternet
>
>
>
> It's not clear to me which side of this you mean for the analogy to
> represent.  If you mean the current digital sovereignty rules, I don't
> think it works.  To me, those would be similar to saying that since the
> same Anti-NAZI regulations present in France are not present in Quebec, you
> cannot provide customer support from Quebec to France, since the customer
> support rep might use the open channel to support NAZI idealogies.  You
> must provide customer support locally, within the jurisdiction that has the
> Anti-NAZI regulations.
>
>
>
> The risk is that this could escalate further, to saying that the French
> telephone system will only allow calls from territories which also have
> Anti-NAZI regulations like those in France, to avoid a similar issue.  That
> would splinter the telephony system.
>
>
>
> regards,
>
>
>
> Ted Hardie
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 9:48 AM Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:
>
> I wonder whether there is an analogy to be made with roads: roads are
> intended to facilitate the transportation of persons and goods, including
> across national borders. But there are restrictions on what can be
> transported, both within national borders, and when crossing national
> borders.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> *From:* Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb at bertola.eu]
> *Sent:* Friday, 27 May 2022 11:40
> *To:* Ted Hardie
> *Cc:* Richard Hill; ISOC Chapters
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Digital sovreignty and splinternet
>
>
>
> Il 2022-05-26 17:25 Ted Hardie via Chapter-delegates ha scritto:
>
> Dear Richard,
>
>
>
> I think you interpret LICRA v. Yahoo in a way that the facts of the case
> do not bear out.  The point of the ruling was that the sales of memorabilia
> were illegal in France despite the servers being in the US.  This would
> tend to argue against the need to force services to be delivered in
> country, since these exceptional cases can already be handled wherever the
> servers are physically located.
>
>
>
>
>
> The reason behind the current trend for data localisation requirements in
> Europe is motivated exactly by the difference in national regulations,
> especially in terms of privacy and data protection. The European Court of
> Justice ruled that the laws of most countries outside of the EU (including
> the U.S.) do not adequately protect the data of European citizens, so their
> data should not be exported there. In particular, the concern about the
> U.S. is related to the CLOUD Act, that forces American companies to
> disclose data of European citizens to American law enforcement agencies,
> even if the servers are in Europe. While there are differences (and
> lawsuits) in terms of interpretation of this act, of course the safest bet
> for the moment is to keep all European data on servers managed by European
> companies, and public officers concerned about this problem are pushing
> just that.
>
>
>
> I don't see how this is "fragmenting the Internet", though. I understand
> the complaints by the American big tech industry, as this is damaging their
> business, but it is not different from any other issue related to the fact
> that you have to comply with local regulation to sell your products in a
> given country, which has always been the case. Nobody ever complained that
> the US is "fragmenting the world" by forbidding Europeans from importing
> certain food products into their country, right? So this has nothing to do
> with the technical or network architecture of the Internet, it is a
> business and legal issue.
>
>
>
> --
> vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
> -------->       now blogging & more at https://bertola.eu/   <--------
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20220529/1a31234b/attachment.htm>