Rumble is a US company so why would they even care to block french users instead of telling them to pound sand.
Are they worried that they will go after companies or attempt to attack them through the financial systems?
Going off on a tangent here, but from the beginning shouldn't we have been treating constitutional articles and amendments as equivalent to the law, or making laws to mirror the constitution - with actual punishments for violators? Because somehow despite the constitution being "the law of the land" it's actually treated with less weight than federal law. Our political leaders "fear" the law more than the constitution, and when in power use it against their enemies as much as possible. Perhaps we need to make it so that when the constitution is violated, the violator (always a government actor or subordinate) has a penalty just as if they'd violated federal law.
Didn't Rumble voluntarily leave the French market a year or two ago because of similar demands or legislation by the French government?
Edit: https://archive.ph/RfpK5
Looks like they pulled out last November over French demands to remove Russian content.
Does the 1st amednmnet not apply?
In France?
No, seeing as it's US law...
Rumble is a US company so why would they even care to block french users instead of telling them to pound sand. Are they worried that they will go after companies or attempt to attack them through the financial systems?
the isp and financial processors are more than happy to do the governments bidding, sometimes even unprompted
Because France might parlay it into wider EU action if Rumble snubs them.
It's not a law, it's an amendment to the constitution. Point stands though.
Going off on a tangent here, but from the beginning shouldn't we have been treating constitutional articles and amendments as equivalent to the law, or making laws to mirror the constitution - with actual punishments for violators? Because somehow despite the constitution being "the law of the land" it's actually treated with less weight than federal law. Our political leaders "fear" the law more than the constitution, and when in power use it against their enemies as much as possible. Perhaps we need to make it so that when the constitution is violated, the violator (always a government actor or subordinate) has a penalty just as if they'd violated federal law.
As a constitutional amendment, is it not the highest law of the US?