There have been numerous cases of companies ignoring local law for both good and bad.

If you remove one viewpoint because of government mandate, while still carrying the other, your platform is creating a biased viewpoint to influence people, that’s on the platform.

1. Require a clear labeling of sunset date.

Or

2. Require an independent trust created from a portion of the initial payment to fund ongoing operation.

Or

3. Ban fixed payments for things with ongoing known operating costs.

Or

4. Provide local mechanisms to continue to run the game.

The original sin is a fixed price for an ongoing expense as a business model.

Mercurial had bookmarks that were roughly the same as git branches.

The linear version numbers were quite useful to reason about and use in places that call for a "number" version number, and were useful relative to your "master" clone. That was not the primary way though, it had hashes like git too, that were the same from clone to clone.

If a government has the ability to fine content providers for providing content to its citizens, why accept IP verification is good enough to determine the user’s jurisdiction and not fine them anyway for providing the content?

The original sin is selling a product that has an ongoing cost for a fixed price without creating an ongoing trust to pay those costs. Imagine I had a gas station that sold all you can use gasoline for a car for 4k. Then I sell a bunch of memberships and pay myself then go bankrupt. That’s straight up fraud.

But, tech has been particularly monopolistic/duopolistic and anticompetitive in a lot of different ways. Avoiding being treated as a commodity the same way many of the employees of those companies have.

Edit: To put a finer point on this, generally,employed people don't get paid more for the excess value they produce, they get paid more for for the delta in perceived value between them and the next best option to fill the position (on a grand statistical scale for careers).

* There are exceptions to this in the form of commission based jobs.

For instance, with respect to url parameters, I have seen people being told they have an Insecure Direct Object Reference, then apply base64 encoding to it to obscure what is going on. To QA they don't notice it looks like junk, it is obscure, but base64 encoded parameters are catnip to hackers.

So in this case, the obscurity made the system worse over time.

Heck, the most cringeworthy phrase "Base64 Encryption" which I have heard many many times.