irtigor

"Aside from" means "except for"... He said that most of them don't attempt to convert people's religion (proselytism) with Jehovah's witnesses being the exception.

And that's the thing by definition it is literally impossible to be an exporter to country X without operating there. In the same way it is literally impossible to claim that telegram is not providing a service for people in Germany if people in Germany a literally using the service as provided by telegram. You want to have our cake and eat it too, the world simply doesn't work like that.

I can't reply the other one but you truly are grasping for straws, in your exemple you coud get convicted in the origin country if buying was illegal, for importing and for owing/using it in the destination country if those were offences. That's exactly what is going on here, there's no middle man providing the telegram service for people in Germany so if hosting/providing that service is illegal (because telegram allows pro-nazi stuff or whatever) who else but telegram will be held responsible? They are the ones operating in Germany providing the chat/group message thing, if there were a middleman (like it happens with games in some cases) the court would be talking to them, just like happens (traditionally) with importers.

The middle man I'm talking about is the one operating in mutiple jurisdictions, so that the "true" seller or buyer doesn't have to (like a importer usually works, buy stuff in a place and brings it to another), what you are talking about is like the shipping company, storage facility owner that rents it out to the importer and stuff like that and those people do get in trouble if they try to get in the middle of the investigation (it would be the same if eg aws did not comply with a judge order of providing the name of who is operating a site so they can get a notice about the illegal stuff they are hosting/providing to users in Germany).

You you didn't understand and I would like to try again, put bluntly: things don't teleport or cross borders by themselves, so someone is always operating in mutiple jurisdictions and can be prosecuted in more the one, traditionally for physical goods it's usually the importer who buys stuff in a place (and can be prosecuted for that if it's something illegal to buy in the origin country), and sell it in another (and can be prosecuted for that if it's something illegal to sell/own/eat/whatever in the destination country), off course the original seller in the origin country or the final buyer in the destination country can also be prosecuted in theirs respectively jurisdictions as well... Now for some online services like chat apps and whatnot there's no such middle man, people in Germany are only able to use telegram because telegram is directly providing the service for them, so if keeping some text online/acessible to people in Germany is illegal the government will go after the person/group responsible for that, in this case telegram to fine/whatever, they even usually provide guidance in cases like this (like "hey providing this kinda stuff over here is illegal, fix your service - delete the content, make it not available to people here/etc - before we have to go to court"), if writing such text is also illegal whoever did it is also in trouble.

Really? I don't think so, your example doesn't even seem particularly good, the importer is the one operating in two countries and that should know what he can legally buy in one and bring to the other, this is not a particularly new concept, in the same way I don't believe telegram itself would get in trouble if someone from another country entered Germany with the app installed in their phone.

Well you always have the option of not doing business in 200 countries, just because the internet made that easier it doesn't mean you must... About consequences for completely ignoring the courts that will depend on what exactly you are being accused of facilitating/doing, who's accusing you... Just as usual.

"Should" has no place in what I'm trying to explain to you. I have never said laws are always fair or anything like it. The point is that you can't have your cake and eat it too, by saying "but my servers are in the usa, just like the physical office", "but it is truly impossible to stop every German user to use my site" and stuff like that you will only sound extremely naive, what they (you or anybody) can do is ignore the request to comply with foregein law and suffer the consequences (be blocked there and/or several others) or comply with the foreign law and that doesn't mean necessarily removing the content (focusing in this case), they can opt to make a honest attempt at blocking Germany users from using the app (leave the German market).

Or they didn't have a parent company with even more economic presence than just them (serving American-centric news with ads), but they would like to have that path still easily open in the future, after all its a big market and... that's the point. Off course you can literally ignore all legal requests for compliance from all foregein countries until they do the worst that they can legally do to you which isn't much if you truly have no particularly strong personal or business related interest in them (lose users that you didn't care to have in the first place, cut a travel destination off your list because if you show up you can be held in prison for not paying a fine... Or whatever), but telegram is not you and apparently they care about being able to continue do business there (allowing people in Germany to use the chat app), so not complying is not a option.

Liking it or not you do have legal or economic presence when you accept people in Germany to visit your site (e.g at first more than a few American websites simply blocked all EU traffic after GDPR was approved), and if you keep violating the local law after being requested to cooperate, they will fine, emit arrest requests and sure enough if deemed necessary also block your website temporarily/permanently, in other words they will do what they would do in any other case even if the full application of the law is less effective because you are not physically there (or have any interest to be) to personally see a big difference in your quality of life.

That is more or less what Arch Linux does. There are oficial repos (core and extra) maintained by Arch Linux developers, an unsupported packages collection (AUR) where anyone can upload a package recipe and an intermediary between those two called community repository that is mantained by trusted users.

What you said is false, if they are operating in my country (and that is true if they are opening accounts/etc to people in my country) they must comply, it doesn't matter that the server is located in another country or anything like that. About the second point sure if they are not operating from a country that requires id identification and are only dealing with clients from places like that it is true, otherwise they will get in trouble, it is just a matter of time (if I'm not mistaken there are even examples of less dumb crypto exchanges creating multiple entities in multiple countries with slightly different urls so that they can have it both ways).

The options truly are just those two in my country if I want to open a bank account, buy stocks and etc, so I expected less sketchy crypto exchanges, payment/crypto acc and etc to implement the same mechanisms because otherwise it is very likely that they are simply not following my local laws and are enabling money laundering, tax evasion and other criminal activities to gain market share. The only thing that is a bit different is that if you physically go to branch they will only record your id and address (they don't need a recorded video of you saying the bank name or similar to verify that those documents belong to you).

Translations, revised editions (to fix typos, add examples or change the bookcover) and adaptations to other media formats are examples of derivative works, so copyright law would be pretty useless without that kind of protection.

You are indeed entitled to simply reprint or republish someone else’s work for profit if it is in the public domain. Copyright blocks most derivative work (with a few exceptionns like parodies), but also blocks verbatim unauthorized copies.

He already gave some examples but to expand a little bit I was moving from a place to another 1km way (at most 10 minutes driving accounting traffic) and needed to hire someone with a small truck, I was able to find bigger companies on google but needed nothing of what they were offering even a small pickup truck would suffice my needs and the only place I got what I wanted was on Facebook (marketplace).

I don't know about France but in my country that's also factored in the law and hiring offers except for jobs that are on managerial level (them the law says you don't have clock in but you also pretty much don't get to clock out and you mostly get paid well for that), which doesn't apply for developers and that means you get paid less if there is no "on call". Basically your base pay is the same on company A and company B (assuming they are truly equal), but since company B requires "on call" that is extra work that gets compensated based on your hourly rate or double that if it is during night time, in the same way for the same job in the same company who ever works night shifts get paid twice as much as the daily shift (before taxes).

I also got interested, there's a link to the github page near the bottom of the site: server is source available, commercial use is only allowed to co-ops and a few other entities, the client is opensource (MIT license).

Based on what I've read it is more or less the same model we have in my country. Employment contracts are either fixed or indefinite term contracts, you can't renew fixed term contracts indefinitely and they are used in specific situations, one of them being to assess or test someone's abilities before offering an indefinite term contract, so 3 months is a short term but not really in the sense that your new employee doesn't necessarily needs to master the job in 3 months, you just need believe or see that they are learning and being as good as other hires in that amount of time.

I agree with you in my area it replaces some FB groups for long distance drives/hitchhiking (a hour or more of driving is not unusual), but not taxis/uber, because the driver sets a price, when they will arrive and where they will meet/drop you (usually a gas station), it is also generally true that it is just gas money (cheaper than a uber fare of the same distance). There is a uber-like service where the passenger makes a fare offer and if I'm not mistaken the driver can make a counter offer, it is called indriver, but I don't know if it exists there.

If you are judging a single action from someone it is impossible to distinguish between "dishonest behavior" and "stupid behavior" (that's assuming you disagree with what they did), so more offen than not you need to dig deeper and compare what they said prior to the incident and what they have to gain with a change. But to make it clear: it doesn't mean that you are wrong (if what they said align with what you believe, it just means that some people are trying to get the same thing you want for other reasons).

Yes, sometimes it is hard to distinguish between extremely dumb and dishonest behavior. Like, a few years ago in my native language someone made a news piece about some women that were working for Google suing the company for unfair wages (according to them, they were making less for the same work) and whoever edited the piece decided to include that according to glossdoor women in tech make less than men, but completely forgot that the same glossdoor said that google was a exemption (based on the information they got).

Latinos is how you gender Latino+Latina in a "purely linguistic way", but some people don't like it, so they made a new word. The masculine word is either gender neutral or "truly" masculine depending on the context, but the feminine counter part always refer to girls/women.

Yes. It is not truly 1:1, as in they probably don't necessarily buy everything they try for free and like, but at the same time were considered a group that spent enough money on the kinda of stuff they get for free... Thinking about the definition, I knew people like that, they were reading 10-20-40 manga per week, some just to see if they liked the content and some regularly, they mostly spent money buying Collector's edition of the stuff they loved but sometimes bought regular prints because the price was deemed good.

So it is 9% and not 5%. "Justifying Infringers" as they were called in your link.

In my country, as a salaried dev, I can definitely get sued for copyright infringement if I decide to quit working for a company and open a competing business. Even if I didn't intentionally copied any code/asset the legal process by itself would be a hassle to deal with when I'm just starting a business and depending on how I decided to write my new stuff for my business I can indeed be found guilty because I unintentionally copied myself (same design decisions, using the same tech stack, variable naming convention, same price formula for... to the point that could be reasonable argued that I just copied and pasted some important portions if not the whole code base), so yeah, if I decided to do something like this I would quit before writing a single line of code for my business and probably take a vacation/work on something else for a few weeks, before jumping in.

You don't need to necessarily eat meat (a glass of milk has half the recommended daily intake of vitamin b12), but if you are not willing to eat any animal product, the only viable alternative is something like fortified plant based beverages or over-the-counter supplements, so that's my take, otherwise they would be suggesting a really poor diet for humans.

My charitable interpretation is that when someone says "eat plants", they don't really mean "only eat plants" but "don't eat animal products, eat plants + enriched foods + injections/pills/tablet", because we are omnivores and we need some nutrients that are incredibly hard to get naturally from plants, like vitamin b12, so in order to stay healthy, without eating animal products, there's only the enriched foods and/or pills/injections/tablets route.

That's a good example that proves my point and the reason why I said "even if think it is justified", it doesn't matter if it is a cap/tax/whatever, it only uses the same mechanisms of money laundering because it is money laundering (they are trying to hide that that money is not clean/legal, that the reason it is illegal is because it was not supossed to legally leave the origin country instead of being drug money, makes no difference to the law, but morally could be ok to some).

That's only true if they are trying to avoid taxation, which is also ilegal (even if you think it is justified). Moving capital from a place to another doesn't use the same mechanisms of money laundering if done legally.