The president of Mexico on Thursday expressed hope that Google “reconsiders” its decision to change its online maps to reflect U.S. President Donald Trump’s claim that he has the authority to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico.

Shortly after taking office, Trump issued an executive order announcing he was changing the name of the body of water to the Gulf of America.

For U.S. users of Google Maps, the gulf was listed as the Gulf of America as of Thursday. Google, whose CEO attended Trump’s inauguration along with other tech moguls, said last month it has “a long-standing practice of applying name changes when they have been updated in official government sources.”

But Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum warned Thursday that her government “will file a civil suit” against Google if it does not revert back to labeling the international body of water the Gulf of Mexico.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14 days ago

    It’s a US company following US policy as it’s a contract holder for the US Government they’re compelled to follow US policy. Whether anyone likes it or not, at least for right now, US policy is that the Gulf of Mexico for all intents and purposes is the Gulf of America.

    President Sheinbaum can sue Google all she wants, but there’s no court that’s going to find that a US company complying with US policy is breaking the law.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      144 days ago

      You could be wrong. While possibly justified on Google’s part, Mexico will most likely sue its Mexican affiliate, and if Google wishes to operate in Mexico, it will have to comply with orders from Mexican courts. See twitter and Brazil for similar case.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -13 days ago

        That’s fully within the right of Mexico as a country, but that has nothing to do with anything that I’ve said here.

        Going forward, the official US policy (because of this executive order) is that it’s the Gulf of America. No amount of suing Google will change that.

    • @JustARaccoon
      link
      English
      74 days ago

      Actually the executive order only renames the parts that the US controls, and they don’t control the entire gulf

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -1
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        It doesn’t “rename” anything. It means the official US position is that the Gulf of Mexico doesn’t exist and instead it’s the Gulf of America. It’s not forcing anyone to call it that other than for official purposes–like in Governmental memos and official US documents–least of all foreign Governments or their people.

        The US doesn’t own the Gulf. We can’t unilaterally change the name. But when the US Government officially refers to the Gulf, it will now be called the Gulf of America. That’s what the executive order did.

        • @JustARaccoon
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          That’s literally what I said my dude, you’re just arguing semantics over the use of “renaming”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -2
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            It’s not at all what you just said. Because it’s not renaming.

            I honestly don’t know how to make this any simpler to digest for you. The EO changes the way the Gulf of Mexico is referenced in official correspondence for the Federal Government. It does not change the name for anyone but the federal government. That’s not the same as renaming it. The US doesn’t own it and can’t rename it.

            Google is a Government contractor and is required to follow US policy to keep those contracts, which is why they’ve also changed it…

            Truly I can’t make it any simpler.

            It would be the same as if Congress passed memorandum changing the name of China to “Teddybear Land.” It doesn’t ipso facto change the name of China for the entire world–but instead when the federal government references China, instead of using the word China they’d use “Teddybear Land.”

            It’s semantics and I cannot for the life of me understand why people are having an issue digesting what’s going on.

            • @JustARaccoon
              link
              English
              23 days ago

              I said it renames the part the US controls, this argument of renaming the entire thing is a figment of your imagination, or you’re replying to the wrong message. Replace “renamed” with “named” in my sentence and then you have no leg to stand on. Your example is stupid, china is not “a part the US controls”, please do not engage in replying to my comments if you’re just going to strawman me.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -13 days ago

                I said it renames the part the US controls

                Okay, and yet again (and for the last time) this is incorrect. It doesn’t rename anything.

    • @Chip_Rat
      link
      English
      34 days ago

      So you are gonna have to provide a source explaining how the president using an executive order to rename international water is “policy” that Google must follow.

      They you’ll have to explain why I, as a Canadian, have to see this stupid renaming in parentheses.

      If the US truely doesn’t have a system beyond “once the president orders it, it’s renamed.” That’s their problem but I don’t give a fuck what they call things and I don’t know why google thinks I should.

      • @InterrobangBang
        link
        English
        13 days ago

        So you are gonna have to provide a source explaining how the president using an executive order to rename international water is “policy” that Google must follow.

        Exactly

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -13 days ago

          Here you go;

          American University Law Review (2009) - The Limits of Executive Power:

          The President has broad discretion in choosing how to exercise these implied powers. Second, these implied powers are not plenary in nature. They are subject to three basic limitations: (1) the President may not, without congressional authorization, use these powers to change domestic law or create or alter existing legal obligations; (2) these powers are subject to regulation by Congress; and (3) in the event of a conflict between the exercise of these powers and congressional legislation, the latter prevails.

          There’s no conflict and therefore within the power of the executive branch.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -13 days ago

        So you are gonna have to provide a source explaining how the president using an executive order to rename international water is “policy” that Google must follow.

        It’s the executive branch. It would be the same as if Congress did the same, and passed a law saying “The Gulf of Mexico is now the Gulf of America.” There’s no source required, it’s literally how the US Government works, but if you want one; American University Law Review (2009) - The Limits of Executive Power:

        The President has broad discretion in choosing how to exercise these implied powers. Second, these implied powers are not plenary in nature. They are subject to three basic limitations: (1) the President may not, without congressional authorization, use these powers to change domestic law or create or alter existing legal obligations; (2) these powers are subject to regulation by Congress; and (3) in the event of a conflict between the exercise of these powers and congressional legislation, the latter prevails.

        There’s no federal law establishing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, so there’s no conflict with the first limitation. No one in Congress is willing to stop him, so no conflict with the second. And there’s no conflict with existing congressional legislation, so there’s no conflict with the third. So therefore the executive order is within the power of the executive branch.

        Because Google is a US company and operates within the US, it has to follow US policy. The President just changed US policy to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico… So they either have to comply or be sued by the executive for not following US policy–which they’ll lose.

        They you’ll have to explain why I, as a Canadian, have to see this stupid renaming in parentheses.

        Because again, Google is a US company. So if you want to see Gulf of Mexico again, use any map provider that isn’t from a US company.

        If the US truely doesn’t have a system beyond “once the president orders it, it’s renamed.”

        That’s an extreme oversimplification of what’s going on here. But it kinda outlines how important it is to elect good people, huh?

    • @InterrobangBang
      link
      English
      13 days ago

      It’s a US company following US policy as it’s a contract holder for the US Government they’re compelled to follow US policy. Whether anyone likes it or not, at least for right now, US policy is that the Gulf of Mexico for all intents and purposes is the Gulf of America.

      We have a bunch of amendments…go look at the first.

      I think you KNOW it’s because Pichai was there and is part of that club now.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -13 days ago

        The executive order doesn’t conflict with anyone’s freedom of speech… The President didn’t release an executive order saying “no one is allowed to call it the Gulf of Mexico anymore!”

        I’m not going to type it all out again, but here you go: https://lemm.ee/post/55471251/18276179