I disagree. People were given a chance to express their opinion. If they cared enough, they should have voted. While that I don't necessarily agree with the ban, it's very important to note that the decision didn't happen in a closed door meeting.
It could be argued that these sort of regulations are not needed at all in the first place - as long as companies are transparent about it and people can vote with their wallets. However, there is a line. Where that line is drawn is decided by the society. I'd be happy as long as that decision is transparent.
Democracy is by no means perfect - transparency and an involved populace would make it work better. If either is found lacking, we should try to make it better.
It could be argued that these sort of regulations are not needed at all in the first place - as long as companies are transparent about it and people can vote with their wallets. However, there is a line. Where that line is drawn is decided by the society. I'd be happy as long as that decision is transparent.
Democracy is by no means perfect - transparency and an involved populace would make it work better. If either is found lacking, we should try to make it better.