Of course they are. Everyone knows musicians are just leeches that take and take and take without giving anything back. Why, without recording companies and industry groups like RIAA, nobody would know what music even sounds like!
"For example, this could prevent French citizens from seeing content that is perfectly legal in France."
There are things France (and others) do as a nation that would be criminal acts in the United States. For example, displaying Nazi symbols or denying the holocaust are illegal in many Western European nations, but are protected speech under US law.
This means that, in theory, someone could sue France in a US federal court for civil/constitutional rights violations. If French law can reach into other countries, then US law can reach into France.
But it goes even further still. Anything you can sue for and win under 42 USC 1983 is also a criminal act under 18 USC 241 & 242. Winning a civil lawsuit for rights violation generates enough probable cause for a grand jury indictment and extradition to stand trial on criminal charges.
I wonder how the President of France would feel about being unable to enter the US or any country we have an extradition treaty with under penalty of immediate arrest for a crime punishable by 10 years to life in prison?
Sod-dumb, cowardly and hesitant/ Is Erdogan the President/ His boner smells like Döner/ Even a pig's fart smells finer/ He's the man who punches girls/ while wearing a bloody rubber mask/ Things he loves the most/ is shagging goats/ and oppressing minorities This kind of criticism would be illegal! Kicking Kurds, beating up Christians/ while watching child porn/ And in the evening instead of a nap/ Fellatio with a hundred sheep/ Erdogan is all things considered/ a President with a tiny wang/ I repeat this is an example of what would be illegal!
I wonder what it would take to get a prosecutor and a grand jury to indict the upper levels of the French government for conspiracy to violate US Constitutional rights -- a felony -- and seek extradition?
After all, if France can reach into other countries and ignore their sovereignty, then naturally other sovereign nations can do the same to France.
You could well be right about that. The FBI collects crime statistics, but their only source of those are the annual and monthly reports by police departments.
If police departments are reporting an increase in officers being charged with crimes and citing video evidence as to why they had to charge them, that WOULD tend to look like video is causing officer crimes from a purely statistics view.
After all, to a bureaucrat, problems don't exist until someone officially takes notice of them, and then the problem was created by the official notice. This is why people with a bureaucratic mentality tend to attack whistleblowers, people who find serious bugs in products, etc.
"no person shall acquire geospatial imagery or data including value addition of any part of India either through any space or aerial platforms such as satellite, aircrafts, airships, balloons, unmanned aerial vehicles or terrestrial vehicles, or any other means whatsoever."
That doesn't seem to be aimed entirely at Google Maps. That reads to me as if someone going on the internet and looking at Google Earth without a license from the government would be subject to a Rs. 10,000,000 fine every time they visited the site.
It's also worth noting that part of Roddenberry's contracts specifically public-domained any possible trademarks on things like tricorders -- the man didn't want to inadvertently prevent the creation of a real tricorder with a trademark on a fictional one.
I wonder what that does to certain copyrights the studios are claiming?