Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge: US Search Warrants Apply To Overseas Computers

Posted by Unknown on from the prepare-for-extradition-to-north-korea dept.

jfruh (300774) writes Investigators in a criminal case want to see some emails stored on Microsoft's servers in Ireland. Microsoft has resisted, on the grounds that U.S. law enforcement doesn't have jurisdiction there, but a New York judge ruled against them, responding to prosecutors' worries that web service providers could just move information around the world to avoid investigation. The case will be appealed.

8 of 502 comments (clear)

  1. It's almost sane(really) by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Going to take a position I know will be unpopular in this thread, but:

    The leverage they have is that you're accused of committing a crime within the borders of the US, and evidence you have access to can be demanded under a warrant that covers details related to that crime. Their physical inability to seize it by force(because it's in another jurisdiction) is about as relevant as their inability to unlock your bank safe. Either way they can punish you for not turning over evidence that is covered by the warrant.

    1. Re:It's almost sane(really) by hawguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Going to take a position I know will be unpopular in this thread, but:

      The leverage they have is that you're accused of committing a crime within the borders of the US, and evidence you have access to can be demanded under a warrant that covers details related to that crime. Their physical inability to seize it by force(because it's in another jurisdiction) is about as relevant as their inability to unlock your bank safe. Either way they can punish you for not turning over evidence that is covered by the warrant.

      Is there any circumstance where you think USA prosecutors should not be allowed to force foreign entities to hand over evidence without going through that country's legal system?

      Like if I'm arrested for smoking pot in the USA and USA prosecutors want to search my bedroom back home in Amsterdam to collect proof of my drug habit, you think its ok for USA police to force my parents to let them search my bedroom back home (or enter their home by force)? Even if my "crime" is only a crime in the USA?

    2. Re:It's almost sane(really) by jbolden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The structure is this
      Microsoft Washington owns a Nevada corporation owns a Bermuda corporation owns Microsoft Ireland. The data is on Microsoft Ireland's physical servers but they hire Microsoft Washington for services and another subsidiary for licensing.

  2. Applies oversea or applies to local access? by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the local branch of Microsoft has access to and control over the servers, they only need to demand the local branch to do so, that doesn't mean they are extended juristiction. If the data could only be accessed from outside the US it would be more interesting.

    1. Re:Applies oversea or applies to local access? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the local branch of Microsoft has access to and control over the servers, they only need to demand the local branch to do so, that doesn't mean they are extended juristiction.

      That could make it more difficult for multinationals to operate though. One of the reasons why companies put data centers in Ireland is to comply with EU rules about the locations of personal information. If the US can pierce EU rules regarding personal information simply because someone in the US has access to the servers, then that could lead to EU rules prohibiting such access.

      During an earlier discussion I thought someone said that the information involved was owned by a US person or organization that was trying to hide by putting it in the EU. That would matter more to me than whether Microsoft had domestic access to the servers.

      I'm not sure that a US court should be deciding this though. It might make more sense to have to appeal to an EU court to pierce this particular veil. That would support EU rights in protecting their data while offering a method for US litigants to gain rightful access to data. Of course, it would also be rather clumsy. But I would rather put clumsiness on litigants than on multinational businesses.

  3. Cuts both ways by jmv · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's going to be interesting when the Chinese government issues Google a warrant to get data from the US.

    --
    Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
  4. Re:In other news... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sadly, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and a bunch of other countries have wanted this for awhile. They want the "law of the Internet" to be that if you do X and you doing X is visible in their country where X is illegal, you've broken the law and can be prosecuted. They drool at the thought of being able to force their laws on the Internet at large. Sadly, this US judge is only helping their plan with his short-sighted ruling.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  5. Re:Finally! by ai4px · · Score: 3, Interesting
    You say loopholes and evade taxes. It's like you've presupposed they are doing evil. Despite what they use being called a loophole, if it's legal, don't blame them for playing by the rules. Blame the idiots who poorly crafted a law.

    A certain paper company used a green energy law that said if you use alternative fuels you can get a tax credit. The paper industry has been burning black liquor since the 1930s and in 2008 figured out they could get the tax credit if they /added/ diesel fuel to their alternative fuel. Congress fixed it within a year. The company did nothing except follow the rules (which are like walking thru a minefield.)