As a digital native, I feel like an international Internet is more important than national sovereignty. That is, I don't think the interesting question is whether US or Brazilian law should apply, the question is how to ensure international access to international digital resources.
It's really the only way to go. Otherwise, you get pissing matches. Brazil blocks WhatsApp. China blocks Facebook, GitHub, etc. Iran blocks so much stuff that people need to get data dumps via satellite TV. The US blocks a lot too, but mostly about gambling, "piracy", etc.
That has nothing really to do with Internet sovereignty (whatever that means).
It has to do with some countries suck more, and some suck less.
Plenty of countries don't block anything. Like military aggression, child mortality, literacy rate, etc., that is one important data point about any country and its government.
I may a.gree with that but still, just because you do not like a law you have to comply. You can try to change it but as long as it exists its law for everyone. You cannot say murder should be legal, therefore I am allowed to do it.
On the other hand, I believe that we have a duty to disobey laws that prevent communication. Civil disobedience is also much easier when you're outside their jurisdiction.
> I may a.gree with that but still, just because you do not like a law you have to comply. You can try to change it but as long as it exists its law for everyone. You cannot say murder should be legal, therefore I am allowed to do it.
Bad laws are bad laws. If you can avoid complying with them, you absolutely should.
