If France was smart, they would have emigrated to JitsiMeet or Jami already.
And then they would force you to use one of those, so your original argument “State forced == bad” still does not make any sense.
Not saying you are wrong about JitsiMeet or Jami being better choices, but that just wasn’t part of your original argument even with a very generous interpretation.
It is unreasonable to expect a state to allow each and every citizen to pick and chose which program to use when communicating with them even if just a single person is involved. As soon as multiple people are supposed to all be in the same virtual room it is effectively impossible.
So what happened here is that the state changed which program(s) it “forces” you to use. Do you have a more specific point about why domestic options are supposed to be worse for that than the ones from U.S. Big Tech companies? Because if not, you don’t have a point at all.
From the article:
As part of the agreements, the Chinese fund granted the remaining minority shareholders an option to require it to purchase their remaining shares for about $9.5 million, now valued at roughly $11 million, by early December 2025.
Legality in country A is completely irrelevant for suing someone in country B.
Also, in many countries having a realistic chance of winning the case is not a prerequisite to suing anyone for anything.