Re: A prediction
He does have a point, though.
There is a need to find a way to make international organisations follow local laws. What is happening here is the prejudice of proper legal process by organisations that feel they are above the law in Australia, and I think that is wrong. If you want to play in a certain market, you have to stick to the rules of that local market. If cannot, you should be stopped from profiting from that market.
Otherwise I see no argument whatsoever why a Far East replicator cannot sell DVD and CD copies - same thing. In their country it's not illegal to replicate and sell, so why should they be stopped elsewhere? All they do is follow their own laws.
FB, Twatter and other US companies are breaching the sovereignty of a state to follow its own laws and actually harming processes that have their foundation in Human Rights(*), and it's seriously time that this is stopped because the main culprit has long seized to be the bastion of democracy and humanity its Hollywood advertising agency is selling it to be. It's a recurring issue with some USA originated businesses, somehow they seem to be brought up there with the idea that being American means you can just ignore what happens abroad - including the law.
If that solution is blocking, so be it. I am *seriously* not a fan of that, but what choice does a nation otherwise have? To me, this is partly a diplomatic issue - the US should be wise enough to ask such companies to play ball with local laws. FB is a business that concerns itself mainly with stealing and reselling people personal details, similar to that other outfit, Google. Both use being "USA" as an excuse to disrespect local laws, and both do not seem to have learned from having their fingers burned. It's almost as if they consider being fined not a reason to follow local law, but more as the cost of doing business with "aliens". Not that the level of fines helps, btw, they need to get above petty cash to have an effect.
(*) On that topic, did you know that the most widely globally accepted Convention, the Convention on the Rights of a Child, has not been accepted by only two countries? One is Somalia, the other one is ... the USA.. Makes it kinda hard to claim to be a leading light in Human Rights, no?