zlacker

>>AareyB+(OP)
Are those US software firms still obligated to comply with EU restrictions and legal demands if they are banned/barred/fascisticly_denied_the_option_to_compete by one or more EU territories?

>>stopbu+Vi
You are being denied the ability to sell to the French government, not denied selling into the market. Just like no one has "rights" to sell to the US government, you don't have any "right" to sell to any foreign government if they choose not to deal with you. And frankly it should be a matter of national security for governments to control the source and deployment of the software they use.

>>tensor+vj2
I am not being denied. They are being excluded from consideration for contracts there.

Fascist isn't fair. I shouldn't have said that. Fascism is when the government controls but does not actually own any or enough shares to control the means of production.

What a shame though. Should US exclude foreign firms (France,) from consideration for contracts for the same reason?

No doubt the tariff master has made this all better with cruel tit-for-tat leverage that caused loss for these US firms.

(EU just canceled aspects of GDPR etc, so it's not new privacy law?)

(Edit: Kushner is currently ambassador to France. Why wouldn't they trust US-based communication firms over there all of a sudden?)