If twitter doesnt like that they can leave the jurisdiction
From the article I get the impression they no longer do. Maybe it's just the article. Unless you mean leaving as blocking Australia IP's.
These are very significantly different cases:
1) a foreign customer buying
2) a foreign company selling
In the first case, the company follows their home law only. On the second case they would have to follow the local law of the customer's country too
Your edit makes even less sense.
1) a foreign customer buying 2) a foreign company selling
Those two happen at the same time. If I’m in Australia and I’m buying something from the US I am a foreign customer (relative to the company) and the company is also a foreign company (relative to the customer)
If you want to export anything you have to follow the laws of the country you’re exporting to.
Import/export laws mostly affect stuff that's going to be resold again, and involve local subsidiaries or contracted distributors.
The two cases I listed do not happen at the same time. Try some other, more charitable interpretation.
If I went out and bought something out of my country, the seller never tried to sell in my country and it makes no sense they would have to follow my local law.
If the seller went out and started selling (doing marketing etc) in my country, that's a different story.
If I'm in Australia and I buy a new alarm clock from an online store in Japan, the alarm clock does not need to meet Australian standards. It's the customer's risk to take.
Another reason is that it is not the job of a company (or random blogger!) to worry about all laws everywhere on the planet. If it were, it would be very difficult to even discuss regionally sensitive issues around religion, territorial disputes or even ongoing pandemics.
If it’s not its job, then whose job is it then?
I’m not going to argue that it’s an easy problem to solve. Far from it. But I also think there has to be some balance otherwise a company can simply set headquarters in a country with as fewer restrictions as possible and run wild.
It is the company’s job to comply with the laws of the country they operate in and I never implied otherwise. This does not mean complying the laws of all other countries where people use the internet.
For example, if you produce online maps and you’re based in China, you’d better be rendering maps that reflect their territorial claims. If you’re based in a neighboring country with competing claims, then those same maps that comply with Chinese regulations could get you into trouble.
> ”… otherwise a company can simply set headquarters in a country with as fewer restrictions as possible”
Yes. That’s how it works. Countries compete in terms of regulatory regime and less onerous ones do indeed attract more business.