> People shouldn't have to tour every possible jurisdiction on earth to have something taken down in the jurisdiction they live in.
Yes, they should. Or they can save a lot of effort and just block it locally.
One sovereign people shouldn't be prevented by another sovereign people from conducting their lives as they see fit. Global rules are incompatible with respecting the vast diversity of humans on this planet.
Hopefully, 9.9.9.9 can apply this ruling specifically to German CIDRs and be done with it.
> Or they can save a lot of effort and just block it locally.
That's essentially the purpose of DNS bans. They are enforced by a given jurisdiction, but they let you solve the root problem rather than running around host providers in foreign jurisdictions.
No, that doesn't work. If anybody could say what should happen globally, and nobody would argue about it, then we wouldn't need courts and borders. The whole point of courts and borders and jurisdictions is to resolve disputes. We wouldn't have copyright law if there weren't copyright disputes. So you can't just say "if any court anywhere decides something, it should apply globally." Because the next court over, in the next jurisdiction, can rule the opposite way. What then?
Yes, they should. Or they can save a lot of effort and just block it locally.
One sovereign people shouldn't be prevented by another sovereign people from conducting their lives as they see fit. Global rules are incompatible with respecting the vast diversity of humans on this planet.
Hopefully, 9.9.9.9 can apply this ruling specifically to German CIDRs and be done with it.