Individuals who live in Europe need to be aware of European regulations and make their own decisions about whether and how to comply with them. Bisq, on the other hand, is just code that those individuals choose to run. Bisq is not a corporation or legal entity of any kind, is not domiciled in Europe or any other jurisdiction, and is therefore not subject to these or any other external regulations. Bisq cannot be externally regulated for the same reason that Bitcoin cannot be externally regulated. Both systems are self-regulating through their own code and systems of incentives and deterrents. In both cases, we know that these self-regulatory mechanisms are sufficient, because the systems work and individuals freely continue to use them. There is simply no place for external regulation here, nor is there any justification or need for it. Bisq is free and open source, radically transparent, and non-custodial. This means that, like Bitcoin, individuals are in control of their funds, and anyone who wishes to do so can inspect every aspect of the way Bisq works. Centralized exchanges, on the other hand, are run by third party corporations running proprietary software, taking custody of user funds, and operating in inscrutable and opaque ways. External regulation does have a place there. Any regulatory body who cannot see the difference between these two radically different ways of facilitating exchange transactions is by definition incompetent and will in the end fail to regulate Bisq. Conversely, any regulatory body who is competent enough to see the difference will immediately recuse themselves from the task of regulating Bisq, for they will understand it is both unnecessary and impossible to do so.