Same Territory Assumption
Under Repeated Game Assumption, much narrower assumption is useful.
The operator and all end-users are in the same nation
The end-users must not use a Plasma which isn't settled in your legal territory
The end-users must be able to sue, or make class action against the operator
Depends on the possible damage of the application on the Plasma, it must be regulated by regional FSA (And so possible damage must be smaller)
Postscript;
Definitely, the Same Territory Assumption doesn't seem to work in unstable country.
Collateral-enforcement for unstable countries.
Like Delawere state law, we can choose defacto court for dispute management even in unstable countries
Law-enforcement for stable countries.
Example sentenses
Paypal is safe under the Same Territory Assumption, but isn't follow to the Law Minimalism.
Plasma Cash is safe without Same Territory Assumption, and is follow to the Law Minimalism.
Plasma Fast Finality (Plasma FF) is safe without Same Territory Assumption, and is follow to the Law Minimalism.
Plasma Contract Fast Finality (Plasma CFF) is safe under the Same Territory Assumption, and is follow to the Law Minimalism.