Those services are not inherently illegal in other jurisdictions* for one thing, and where specific activities have been deemed illegal the operators either abide by the judgment of the courts or exit the market. Case in point: Google allowing EU citizens to apply for delisting of privacy-infringing search results in accordance with EU data protection laws.

* I'm not sure about places like North Korea, but trying to offer services there would be embargoed by domestic sanctions in any case.

Google is a huge multinational company with sufficient nexus in the EU (specifically France) to fall under the jurisdiction of that ruling. This sounds like an app developed by a small team, physically and legally located far outside of San Francisco. If the city tried to enforce a judgment against them, it should be laughed out of court.

I'm not sure why so many here are so quick to throw the hackers under the bus as soon as they agree with the government's demands. This kind of thing could happen to anyone, and ruin any controversial startup.

If you're doing business somewhere, as ParkingMonkey is in SF, then there's sufficient nexus for them to come under the jurisdiction of that place.

So what if it's a small team offering this service remotely? What stops them deploying this in their home town of Rome? And what makes you so sure that claims against them would be laughed out of court? True, any judgment against them would take a long time to enforce, hence the city exploring the more practical route of asking Apple to cease enabling their activity. But cross-border litigation happens all the time.

I don't think that's what he meant.

He meant running a business, from SF, whose primary activity takes place in Rome, and was also illegal in Rome.

Not just running a business from SF that's illegal in Rome.