Slashdot Mirror
US Twitter Spying May Have Broken EU Privacy Law
Stoobalou writes "A group of European MPs will today push EU bosses to say if the US government breached European privacy laws by snooping on Twitter users with links to whistle-blowing site WikiLeaks. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) will today pose an oral question to the European Commission, seeking clarification from the US on a subpoena demanding the micro-blogging site hand over users' account details."
Where is Twitter based?
Where is the EU?
Just Askin.....
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Aren't tweets public anyway? And what does it matter if they found links to the latest video/picture of some fat/old person/animal singing?
Then what?
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
I guess European citizens should probably avoid web sites based in totalitarian police states. After all, what is the European Parliament going to do, write a stern letter to Obama?
Here's what'll happen: People in authority will ignore that letter, the same way they currently ignore the Constitution, and just do whatever they claim is necessary to support their overly broad mandates. The politicians will yuk it up, knowing that they are free to do whatever they wish, and their buddies in the security theater business will continue pointing at brown people shouting "MUSLIM!!!" or "HOMEGROWN EXTREMIST!!!" and "THINK OF THE CHILDREN DERP DER DOO!!!" and the people on the street will wave their tiny American flags, too stupid to realize that they could be next.
Ultimately it's the fault of each and every US citizen that this sort of thing has been allowed to happen. If Europeans have to blame anybody for the fact that they are spied upon in their Twitters and Facebooks and Gmails, they should blame the next stupid American they meet.
So following someone on twitter is a violation of privacy law?
Since when is an American government dealing with an American company bound by European rules? Nobody forced us Europeans to sign up for Twitter. I think we're all aware it's an American entity and that American law applies above all others in this situation.
Somebody doesn't understand how the US legal system works:
Subpoenas get issues by courts, so there is a "judicial enquiry" and judicial oversight. And there is a potentially illegal act, namely the release of classified information; the prosecutor had to convince the judge of that. The order was by a US court to a US company. Furthermore, the individuals targeted were informed and given an opportunity to object.
In Europe, police would be able to get this information without any judicial oversight, without anybody being informed, and without anybody being able to object.
The complaints by these MEP are unfounded and apparently just being made to score political points; beating up on America is a politically successful strategy in Europe.
Its not about reading tweets.
And your post shows you are not about reading TFA.
So run off and read TFA before you make a fool out of yourself. mmmmkay?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Its not about spying on twitters and facebooks and gmails.
Go read the TFA before posting.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Maybe my dictionary is out of date, but I never have thought that a court ordered subpoena is a "spying" activity. If they broke in to twitter and trolled through data that would be spying.
Looking at the website it's coming from... maybe I understand now why they think a subpoena is "spying". They say the Bradley Manning is currently being tortured by US jailers, and insinuate the subpoena is a front to cover the trail of supposedly confirmed NSA wiretaps 2x blocks from Twitter HQ. Sure sounds like level headed, unbiased facts abound there.
http://www.thinq.co.uk/2011/1/8/us-wants-read-wikileakers-twitter-accounts/
Of course it is. What Europeans should realize is that their data protection and privacy laws don't matter when they are communicating over web sites based in the USA.
What did you take away from the article?
I hereby bet my life savings (past, present and future) that nothing - absolutely nothing - even _can_ come of this. Does it even matter if anybody cares any more?
Not the same. Radio stations pay a licensing fee for a public performance of the music, not a fee for a private listening. Its public broadcasting because it was paid by the radio station to be publicly broadcasted.
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
The article isn't about spying on Twitter. Its about demanding the information without a legal reason to do so. The US has no legal leg to stand on for demanding this information, yet they did it anyways.
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
Wikileaks = red pill
Fox & CNN = blue pill
The europeans in question should take the time to read into English law and thus American law, before making such statements, it makes them look ignorant at a time when they is the last time they should be looking foolish. If they had, they would understand that evidence of a crime is not necessary; look up what the purpose of the grand jury is, it's limitations on civil rights, et cetera. This is not a Bush-American-Post-11-Sept thing, its a pretty fundamental part of American law, although admittedly its purpose is more or less always subverted by the way they're currently operated.
Mind you I'm not agreeing with the way things work, I'm just pointing out that its a pretty fail way to try and stop things.
"In Europe, police would be able to get this information without any judicial oversight, without anybody being informed, and without anybody being able to object."
Wrong. Logs from ISP and company are also subject to the equivalent of subponea. Where the heck did you get this idea that the police could get whatever they want without judicial oversight ?
It's not particularly unusual for a side in a legal proceeding to attempt to exceed what they're allowed to do. It's kind of a part of the adversarial justice system. Twitter now files a motion to quash the subpoena based on whatever reasoning they choose, and we go from there.
They do have the legal right to request the information. This comes under US law and given that there is an ongoing investigation into what Pfc Manning may or may not have leaked it most certainly is relevant. Now, it might be that most or all of the people aren't involved, but you can't very well know that without doing an investigation.
If you don't like our privacy laws, then don't user our services. I don't think that it's that unreasonable to recognize that a service that's headquartered and provided from a foreign state is going to be beholden to foreign laws.
I did look, and I couldn't find any evidence that Twitter is anything other than a US company.
And your post shows you are not about reading TFA.
Oh I read the TFA.
But I also read the story summary, which explicitly states US Twitter Spying May Have Broken EU Privacy Law
My response is for whoever wrote THAT.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The US has a "justice system"? That's like saying that the US are a democracy.
The darn US can go fuck themselfs every which way they can plus some just who the fuck do they think they are fucking jumped up tossers thats all fucking wankers
Yes, your logic is valid. Situation being what it is, they need to comply with the subpoena or face consequences in the USA. They also operating in EU doesn't exclude them from the USA law.
That said, if they want to operate in EU, they ALSO have to comply with EU laws or fase consequences in the EU. They operating also in the US doesn't exclude them from the EU law if they want to operate in the EU.
Let's say that there is a country A where age of consent is 16 and sexual pictures of 16 year olds can be traded legally. Now, let's say that a company B that deals in that area. They want to operate in the US. They can't trade the same pictures of 16 year olds because it wouldn't be legal in the USA. If they want to operate in the USA, they need to comply with the USA laws and from that point, it is irrelevant whether they comply with the laws in where they are located or not. Are you trying to argue that the USA courts should just say "Hey, they're located in A and that's legal in A so let's allow it here, too"? No? Similarly, if Twitter is breaking an EU law and operates in EU, EU courts won't just say "What they're doing is legal in USA so we won't prosecute". Now, if the two laws comply, that's Twitter's problem but not really relevant from EU's point of view.
Now, the only question left is "Does Twitter also operate in the EU (IE: do they need to care if EU says that what they're doing is illegal)?". I would guess that the answer is "yes". But you aren't really arguing against that.
On the face of it this may be silly as EU law obviously doesn't apply to US companies. That however would be misreading the whole thing. The EU is controlled by two entities the European Parliament and the Commission. The latter writes the laws and proposals and the former votes for or against them.
Members of European Parliament (MEPs) are democratically elected. Their primary problem is that nobody in Europe cares what they do or what they say. The EU decisions are in practice always complex compromises. The UK may vote for privacy laws the Netherlands wants in exchange for increased fishing quotas and the Netherlands wants it because the Dutch government can use it as a political tool for some other purpose. In short political ideology does not exist in the EU. This is a big problem for MEPs as they can't get reelected unless they get enough publicity and look as if they are doing something the voters care about. The system works against them and so on occasion they make loud noises about any issue they think will be of interest to the voters. Given the complex nature of compromises in the EU they seldom have the opportunity to do this. In this case the opportunity they saw was in the word "twitter". They know that voters recognize it and have scrambled to make themselves look like they are doing something decisive in the public interest. It's not real, it's just collecting brownie points from the public and getting their name in the papers. So you can forget about it. It has nothing to do with EU privacy laws or the US or twitter - it's strictly a PR thing.
The other branch of the EU executive and legislative power is the Commission. It has two functions. One is to act in the interest of the entity that controls it - the EU's civil service and the other is to provide a mechanism for national level politicians to get unpopular decisions through. The EU is run and controlled by the EU bureaucracy - it's civil servants. The Commissioners represent primarily the interest of their departments. The interest of the civil service is entirely self serving. They are for sending SWIFT data to the US as it will mean many fact finding trips to the US and other countries for the people in the departments. They are strongly for the introduction of checks and balances for sending the data as it creates more work for the civil service and ultimately increases their budget. The politicians on the national level have no problem with this as their use of the Commission is to get through unpopular legislation. When something popular is introduced it's always handled at the national level and the local politicians take credit for it. When it's something unpopular they simply say "we hate it too, but it's EU legislation, we can't do anything about it".
That's how the system works and it's not easy for the MEPs as they are not civil servants, they are politicians and need publicity and votes while they are not really meant to have any significant political power. That's why there was such an outrage at the EP rejecting a gay bashing candidate for the post of the Commissioner for Justice a few years back. Things like that are not supposed to happen and as a rule they don't. So when you hear that the EP is making an inquiry or that MEPs are making noises about something, you can safely ignore it. It doesn't have to make sense as nothing will ever come of it - they are just trying to get themselves noticed in order to get reelected.
What a stupid person you must be. We'll hurt you where it counts; money. Screw you and your country.
Your mistake is assuming that American law applies. There's no question that it's legal within the US, however services offered in Europe to European citizens is subject to European law. The information sought is clearly protected under European laws.
Why do I even bother? It's Slashdot, mostly Americans and people reading this don't know the details of any legal system.
It will of course be illegal to market certain products in the EU. For instance products that don't give the amount of privacy EU-citizens are used to. So, this is just EU giving a heads-up because if USA still want its companies to be able to market their services in the EU, they have to follow certain minimum standards. I think it was very polite of the EU to give this warning. What they could do is to suspend all activities by Twitter in the EU. This means blocking all banking-transfers to EU, and giving fines to companies using Twitter to market their products. You can't have full access to the inner market and expect no oversight. When USA said it wanted to stop off-shore gambling-sites, it set precedence in these kinds of cases.
There is a problem in the EU, some American companies control lots of data regarding EU citizens. That problem will have to be dealt with in the long run. If not, those companies will not have their access to the inner market terminated.
It actually applies to foreign companies for the storage of data pertaining to EU users.
I actually worked on something relating a month ago and the rules are there and the law exists for any service based in any country to take extra care when storing EU citizen data.
The result of this relating to the subpoena? The US simply cannot subpoena data relating to EU residents, only to US residents.
And that is it gentlemen; of course if the US wants to further degrade their reputation with Europe they can always walk all over European regulations they agreed to respect when handling EU data.
That won't be the first time the US just does what it wants and shits on everyone else, but it may be the last... Patience towards the US tantrums is running out in the EU...
--
www.twilightcampaign.net
The US is dealing with a US-based website, whose members are involved in a criminal investigation.
They absolutely have a right to issue a supoena.
Wrong. EU law applies to US companies conducting business in the EU. I can't see Twitter foregoing business in the 27 country EU as it is a market of over 500 million people.
I think the bottom line is, regardless of where Twitter is based, it has an ethical obligation to abide by EU laws if it wants to serve content to EU citizens. No one forced Twitter to serve content to the EU, they could have easily put up one of those (rather common) "XYZ content is not available in your country" pages. Not to mention that the fact that (to point out the blatantly obvious) EU citizens are (for the most part) not US citizens/residents, and therefore, the US has >> no right to our data; we're nothing to do with the US. If the US did want the data for some legitimate reason they could always ask through the proper channels. I have no idea whether there would even be a chance of them getting it, but that's not the point. Before going any further I would like to say I am NOT anti the American people (emphasis on people), in fact I quite like Americans. Nevertheless, the American government (emphasis on the government being different from people) has been getting up to much douchebaggery of late and a lot of us in the EU are getting quite annoyed about it. I think it's about time someone gave them a kick up the backside. Frankly I hope the next US government actually has a decent foreign policy. Over the past 10 years the Bush and Obama administrations have been alienating people overseas, increasingly isolating the US; and that's not good for anyone!
In addition, these laws apply to the three EEA countries - Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, and to Switzerland.
Ahh, those where the days...
/Gee, our old LaSalle ran great.
Nah, we'd be safe. Friendly fire will do for you, with the lovely side effect that, for a change, it wouldn't be a UK Tank column being shot by the American "allies".
There is a perfectly legal reason to do so. Judges dont grant court orders without legal reasons. And given that the court order has been obtained, it is presumed legal.
If twitter and other US services can delivery your private data to the government there, then it should be better to use services based in the European Union.
....... slashdot!
That will not only affect twitter but also facebook, linkedin, gmail and
Maybe some small country could good business guarantying that customer information of services hosted there are kept private, sort of a swiss, lichtenstein or luxemburg internet privacy haven.
If you want to introduce on EU domains you don't break EU law - and if you keep defending amoral behavior by the US does that mean you wants war?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Quite an apt description, but it would make more sense if you didn't leave out the third and most shadowy body of EU government: the Council. The Council is composed of national ministers for whatever issue is the topic at the time. If it's energy, it's the energy ministers (or the closest equivalent), if it's agriculture it's the agriculture ministers etc, and for the most important issues the Council is made up of the prime ministers. It's kind of like a senate, but much worse. Everything they do happens behind closed doors and the public doesn't know anything until they come out to shake hands and smile for the cameras. The Council is arguably the most powerful of the three bodies of EU gov, and this is where all the horse-trading and bickering happens, not the Commission or the Parliament. Neither the Commission nor the Parliament has national interests in mind; the Commission serves the entire EU (and its own bureaucracy, some like to say) and an MEP serves his constituency. Council ministers represent states, and most everything undemocratic or otherwise "bad" about EU gov has to do with it.
I think it's funny how a company pride themselves on a model of transparency get touchy when their private information get released but they appear to have no problem when it comes to releasing some else private information. Can we all say hypocrites.
If twitter don't do business in the EU, how come there are EU citizens in there to datamine?
Coming again, to save the mother fucking day yeah!
All of a sudden a lot of people became totally in favor of the government snooping on Twitter users.
My UID is prime. Hah!
"Judges dont grant court orders without legal reasons."
Ho hoo! /wipes tear from eye I think you meant to say, judges don't grant orders without legal PRETENSE.
I don't think anybody is likely to attack the USA by force. Way too expensive, the USA has nukes anyway. Too many people would die.
I think they would be far more likely to make you dependent on their resources (say cheap clothes and raw materials) and then slowly influence your policies over a few decades to be favourable to their country and gradually take over you indirectly through influence and getting preferential deals for all their trade.
Why would anybody need to invade you if they control your resources? People only used to invade other countries because they wanted the land for people to settle on, the riches of the other country, the resources at a preferential deal, or the politicians of the other country to favour them. There are other ways to achieve that today.
Can you think of any other reason why somebody should invade you?
So behave yourselves -- you won't see us coming if we don't want you to...
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/02/international/americas/02CANA.html?ex=1070946000&en=37b83e09654ed443&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
Non-paywall:
http://forum.grasscity.com/general-marijuana-news-around-world/31035-canada-steers-closer-europe-than-u-s.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x248028
"I thought they were the dominant species..."