We were too small and bent, also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice.
The kind of vague phrasing that makes one immediately suspicious. What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea?
> also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice
You're literally operating in the US then. It's obvious US laws would apply if you're serving US customers.
It doesn't matter which those were, we were obliged to respect laws of the European country we were incorporated, not US ones.
Laws are not a buffet. You choose to do business in a market, you've opted to be regulated in that market.
You are absolutely free to sell your services to whoever you want, but the US is equally free to refuse to allow you to operate domestically if you're breaking their laws (and otherwise make your life difficult if you e.g. rely on US banking infrastructure). If you want to do business in Iran, don't expect to do business in the US.
You choose to do business in a jurisdiction, you bind yourself to their laws. That means all laws, not just ones you like, or think that are relevant to your business. Laws are not a buffet.
Don't do business in jurisdictions where you feel like you cannot comply with domestic law. No one is requiring you to do business in the US. People choose to do business in the US so they can profit from US customers, and that's totally fine, but doesn't come with some magical immunity to US law.
1. This isn't about business but charges. There's no way in hell US can e.g. prosecute non us citizens from trading with Cuba e.g. the embargo applies to US individuals and companies. The rest of the world, e.g. European countries, have normal relations with Cuba and nobody gives two damns about the embargo.
2. The same thing happens in reverse and applies to US companies doing business overseas.
Sure it can. It can do whatever it wants in its domestic courts. Turkmenistan can prosecute you and me right now for failure to pay insufficient deference to dear leader. Whether this impacts us in any way is the actual question. We presumably do not want to do business in Turkmenistan. But the OP wants to do business in the US. Ergo, the OP is subject to US law, irrespective of what he thinks US law should look like or what its limits ought to be.
OP doesn't have to do business in the US at all and be completely and utterly untouched by US law - he won't be extradited anywhere unless the offence in question is also an offence in his own country, which as you point out, the Cuban embargo (etc) isn't. This is how you and I stay safe from the many Turkmenistani indictments hanging over us.
This is not a case of someone bravely standing up for justice and freedom, this is a case of someone wanting to profit from US customers but somehow have total immunity from US law. And I'd respectfully point out that if the countries were reversed, and we were talking about e.g. Russia, the European countries would be apoplectic about anyone doing business there. Imagine a Brazilian company selling drone motors to Russia. Can its executives expect to travel freely through the EU without fear of arrest? Do business in the EU?
Anyone who sells to my enemies is my enemy. You yourself can be subject to embargoes.
Francesca Albanese cannot do banking with banks from her own country because the US said so. Read: third parties that have relations with the US are barred from doing business with you or else risk being blacklisted too.
https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-12-28/the-comp...
> The European Union does not recognise the extra-territorial application of laws adopted by third countries and considers such effects to be contrary to international law.
(yes the irony is palpable)
> The blocking statute prohibits compliance by EU operators with any requirement or prohibition based on the specified foreign laws.
It is illegal to comply with certain US sanctions in the EU. This is most likely what GP is talking about.
https://finance.ec.europa.eu/eu-and-world/open-strategic-aut...
I mean I find this quite plausible, but you should tell the guys in the thread above, who are all posting "ha, the UK thinks it can tell a non-UK website what to do, how absurd!" and metaphorically pouring their tea out in Boston Harbour.
They're both examples of Country A putting a law on the books that constrains sites in Country B. "Don't sell", "don't serve", "don't stand on one leg while fulfilling orders", they're all the same class of overreach.
I don't think this is how the law works.
Think of it this way: any customer from Libya makes it customary for my female co-workers to wear hijab at the workplace.
Thus a customer who voluntarily purchases services from a company in a different jurisdiction does NOT automatically makes this company subject to his jurisdiction.
Libya doesn't actually have a law requiring foreign companies to wear hijabs, but if they did, they could try to enforce it. The smart thing to do would be to stop doing business there. If you don't, they would probably force Libyan internet providers to block you, and maybe file charges against you and possibly your customers there. If you live in Europe, you could probably ignore the charges, but most people don't want that hanging over their heads, especially when your Libyan business has been shut down anyway.
Consider when Russia tried to impose a fine on Google that was worth more than the total amount of money that has ever existed globally. Google just stopped doing business in Russia, because obviously that was their only choice.
It doesn't. Laws only apply to a certain territory.
So if Libya doesn't like the way I provide services to their citizens they can impose any laws they want but these laws only work on their own sovereignty.
Bahahaha. Good one! Let's be real, consumer protection laws might as well not exist for Americans.
Before the "well akshually"s - Do they exist? Yes. Are they enforced? Barely, if at all. Do you have any hope of recourse if they're ignored? Nope! Are they being ripped to shreds by the current government in real time right this very minute? You betcha.
So any customer from Libya makes it customary for my female co-workers to wear hijab at the workplace, right? Same logic.
No.
A customer who voluntarily purchases services from a company in a different jurisdiction does NOT automatically makes this company subject to his specific jurisdiction.
I don't like it same as you because it makes doing business on the internet complicated but it's how it works in practice.
Why though? Libya has no jurisdiction over my business in the EU. I place no restrictions on who can purchase a subscription on my SaaS. I certainly can sell to customers in Libya.
All Libya can do is ban my business, but they can only implement that ban within their own sovereign borders.
So, no.