Because the EU is a dumpster fire when it comes to tech companies (probably not a coincidence). This means that few websites are actually based in the EU. If the EU doesn't like them then they can block the sites.
The downvotes are no doubt because you've violated the site guidelines with name-calling and flamebait. The damage that does is more important than the value of the information you're adding, so downvotes and flags are correct. It's too bad, because there's the kernel of a good comment there too.
Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN as intended? It's not hard if you want to, and you're a good user otherwise. We've had to ask you this many times.
It is probably related to the complete lack for jurisdiction in calling the US "lawless" that attracts the downvotes.
Most people understand that Saudi Arabian Blasphemy laws mean jack shit if you have no connection their laws can't apply. Making any pretense of validity beyond ability to enforce the laws just makes any making claims utter tools. Just because the other block is an EU nation instead of a backwards monarchy petrostate doesn't change that one bit.
What if the law said that the company has to serve EU users the same way it serves non-EU users, and to do otherwise would be considered an act of trade war by a private US corporation against the EU (the same as if e.g. a US private defense contractor, hired by some other power, hacked into EU corporations and caused property damage against them)—basically making the whole thing into a “diplomatic incident” each time it happened?
Heck, what if they said that everyone doing things their way is their condition on staying in WIPO, and if a country can’t bring its corporations into line, then the EU will declare all WIPO IP-right assertions originating from that country null and void within the EU, free for any EU corporation to exploit?
I don't think anyone should be forced to service foreign nations. As a citizen of a non EU country, I'd take issue with being compelled to work with them.
EU would effectively be declaring war on a significant percentage of the world. They have no jurisdiction beyond their borders.
Taking your ball and going home, while not the best for business, should be an option.
I mean, you're not forced to service foreign nations. But if you are trading with foreign nations, then you've got to realize that that is fundamentally a voluntary relationship—trade doesn't exist by default, it is created by a spirit of mutual cooperation, on a foundation of compromise. If that spirit of cooperation and foundation of compromise don't exist, then the trade cannot exist.
Or, to put that another way: WIPO itself is something the US "forced" on the rest of the world. But it wasn't actually force; it was just a condition on other nations continuing to trade with the US.
As I said, taking your ball and going home should be an option. That implies NOT trading with EU.
As per wiktionary.org:
"To cease participating in an activity that has turned to one's disadvantage, especially out of spite, or in a way that prevents others from participating as well."
