Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Gets Industry Support Against US Search Of Data In Ireland
An anonymous reader writes Tech giants such as Apple and eBay have given their support in Microsoft's legal battle against the U.S. government regarding the handing over of data stored in an Irish datacenter. In connection with a 2014 drugs investigation, U.S. prosecutors issued a warrant for emails stored by Microsoft in Ireland. The firm refused to hand over the information, but in July was ordered by a judge to comply with the investigation. Microsoft has today filed a collection of letters from industry supporters, such as Apple, eBay, Cisco, Amazon, HP, and Verizon. Trade associations including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Digital Rights Ireland have also expressed their support.
Does not matter if communist, socialist or capitalist. They are all obsolete. All them.
In my understanding, politicians should live only with what they provide to the population. They should not be responsible for public health-care if they are not obligated to use that very same service as well! They should also be obligated to use public transport, education, etc.
Oh, they don`t like the idea... ok, the door is at the left. Next!
Surely there is some analog to 'extradition' for search warrants, isn't there?
The idea that any nation you happen to have a presence in can demand something you have in any other nation seems like an obviously dangerous shortcut to most-abusive-common-denominator law; but being able to black-hole anything just by shifting the VM across the border presents its own problems.
Is there actually no such instrument, and this sort of thing somehow hasn't come up enough to be settled, or did the Fed prosecutors just demand first and try tact later because they aren't exactly lacking for arrogance(or, in fairness, lacking for reasons to be arrogant, given how often they get away with it)?
Part of me hopes Microsoft loses and this costs the huge US tech conglomerates oodles of overseas business.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Honestly, I'm having a little bit of a hard time deciding what I think about this. On the one hand, I'm very much in favor of privacy, and it seems to me that the rules for searching a server in Ireland should be approximately the same as the rules for searching a storage locker in Ireland.
On the other hand, I feel that it's important to consider that, with the whole "cloud computing" thing, it doesn't necessarily matter where your data is stored. For example, I might throw a document in my Dropbox folder and it get synced to "the cloud", and I have no idea where that file is physically located. It could be in Ireland, for all I know. So even though I may not live in Ireland or access it from Ireland, I may not have intended to store it in Ireland, and I may not even know it's in Ireland, it happens to be stored in Ireland at this moment. It could be shuffled off to another physical location tomorrow.
So I guess that makes me wonder, in such a hypothetical circumstance, if declaring it absolutely within the jurisdiction of Ireland might be opening a bit of a can of worms. If I throw a file up in my Dropbox and it ends up cached in Russia, without my knowledge or permission, is it now subject to Russian copyright laws? Is it now subject to Russian decency laws? If the information is considered illegal in Russia, am I now guilty of smuggling?
I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, so maybe I'm wrong to think that there might be some weird repercussions.
A person defies a valid court order? They're arrested and in jail for contempt of court.
Unless, of course, the person is a white cattle rancher.
No, the issue is if it truly is a valid court order.
See, if an American court decides that American laws are extra-territorial ... that is the point at which the rest of the world sends a big "fuck you" to America. (Which is long overdue anyway.)
And any sane country would say "OK, Microsoft, if you do this in violation of local laws, we're going to fine you a percentage of global revenues ... because our laws are now extra-territorial."
Microsoft in Ireland may be a wholly owned subsidiary, but it is a separate legal entity operating under the laws of Ireland, and incorporated under Irish law. You can't bypass the Irish courts because Microsoft US owns Microsoft Ireland.
It doesn't work that way.
The PATRIOT ends at the point where an Irish corporation, subject to Irish laws, is told to adhere to a court order by an American court, without consultation with an Irish court.
That's about as self entitled and delusional as you can get as a nation.
If corporations are legally people, then Microsoft Ireland is a citizen of Ireland, and not subject to US courts. Either way, Microsoft Ireland is 100% subject to applicable Irish law.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The problem is that the US courts ruled that US law does apply in Ireland because Microsoft has a presence in both countries.
And you think that somehow the ruling of a US court absolves Microsoft from Irish law?
Because that's a complete crock of shit, and the only way Microsoft in Ireland exists as a corporation is under Irish law.
So, I'm sorry, but a US court cannot compel a foreign citizen or corporation in that country to break local laws just because there is a relationship with a US company.
The problem is that a US court believes it has the authority to make Microsoft Ireland violate the laws of Ireland, when Microsoft Ireland isn't under the legal jurisdiction of that US court. And that's simply not true.
Microsoft is saying "If you want this, go to an Irish court, but don't demand that we break the law for you".
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The US cannot force a sovereign foreign company? The US can force (or "persuade") entire countries and groups of countries to dance when they play the pipe, you think this would change anything?
TTIP, anyone? So far I cannot see anything in there that is NOT exclusively beneficial to the US and puts everyone else at a severe disadvantage, but do you see any kind of protest against it from inside governments?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The US can bite my shiny metal ass with a court order. I'm neither there nor in a country that would send me over.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The implications are far further reaching than whether you can wash your dirty tax laundry somewhere offshore. This is about a country wanting to reach into the jurisdiction of another country and dictating them how to behave. That is unacceptable, especially from a country that is considered friendly. How do you think the US would react if Ireland told them to hand over documents from the branch of an Irish company 'cause they think that they try to harbor documents belonging to the IRA there.
Just in case anyone comes in and says "but terrorism"...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The problem is that the US courts ruled that US law does apply in Ireland because Microsoft has a presence in both countries.
But there are decades of precedence for this: see the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 and the 1988 ruling applying to foreign firms.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
America is all about race. Only cowards would deny the obvious.
Slightly more complicated:
The issue is whether something stored in Ireland but accessible from the USA is subject to a warrant. Yeah, the data is on an Irish server. But the person issued the warrant is in the USA and has direct access (and probably a certain amount of control) of the server.
It still opens a can of beans the US Federal government REALLY doesn't want opened, but it's not like the US Government has had much restraint placed on its activities since the days of FDR....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
The order isn't against any person or entity in Ireland. It is against a US company, and US employees, who can access the data from their desks in the US. Under US law, it is certainly a valid order. Under Irish law, it is not. There is a conflict that the US prosecutor (and judge) do not want to (or can't, under current law) address. No matter what Microsoft does, they will break the law somewhere.
This is a surprisingly (for the source) thoughtful account of things so far, and explains the reasoning behind the order.
I doubt you will bother to ready it, and likely won't understand it if you do, and certainly won't care, but there it is.
Again, if they comply with the order, whoever does so in Europe (or is in Microsoft Europe and even *allows* it to happen by lax security, or whatever excuse) is in breach of the EU Data Protection laws.
The courts are thick if they don't understand this. Either Microsoft US gets brought before a US court for non-compliance of Microsoft Europe gets brought before a European court for compliance.
This is why we have jurisdiction. This is why you apply to have your court order validated in the jurisdiction you want to enforce it in. This is why it would be refused in such a jurisdiction, anyway.
Anyone who complies, assists or even ALLOWS this kind of movement of personal data, on European soil, will be brought before a court.
It doesn't matter what industry supporters come out (and Apple / Microsoft are hardly rivals - don't they own shares in each other?), it's just a stupid, overreaching legal decision that nobody can legally comply with.
America is all about race. Only cowards would deny the obvious.
The race to the bottom, maybe. Making "race" the center of everyday life? Only for minorities (and I'm not talking racial minorities). It's not race that's at issue in the US anymore; it's societal norms. There's an "African American" culture, a "Latino" culture, a "White Power" culture, and a plethora of others. For the most part, these have nothing to do with genetic background or inherited traits, and everything to do with the cultural norms as accepted by one group and not by another. These days someone with a grandmother from China, a grandfather from Mexico, another grandmother from Italy and the last grandfather 6th generation African American isn't really all that abnormal. And yet this person could validly claim to be part of any of the most vocal race-based groups in the US. But what really matters is how they speak, where they live, and how they dress. THAT's what America is all about. Status.
The problem you have is the word "valid".
It's invalid to issue a court order that extends outside your court's jurisdiction, especially if to do so actually encroaches on - and contradicts the law of - another jurisdiction.
In the EU, it's illegal to reveal or transfer personally-identifying data without the explicit permission of the persons mentioned in that data. Neither Microsoft America, nor Microsoft EU, have that permission. To do so, they would have to ask the people who the data is about (who are going to say no), or get a *VALID* EU court order that says they can.
Of course, this could all be resolved by the US court asking the EU court to help by getting the EU court to provide an order for discovery, but they're too fucking stupid to do that and apparently think they control the world.
Microsoft in Ireland may be a wholly owned subsidiary, but it is a separate legal entity operating under the laws of Ireland, and incorporated under Irish law. You can't bypass the Irish courts because Microsoft US owns Microsoft Ireland.
If I own a car located in Sweden, and I'm a US citizen in the US, arrested in the US... can the court compel me to make arrangements to produce for the court something in that car's glove box? I don't actually know...could one? Its not entirely unreasonable to speculate that they could make that demand and then hold me in contempt if I refused to make that arrangement.
Microsoft in Ireland may be a wholly owned subsidiary, but it is a separate legal entity operating under the laws of Ireland, and incorporated under Irish law.
According to you, it is also the legal property of Microsoft US. They don't need to compel the Irish to do anything. They can (arguably) simply compel the US entity in their jurisdiction to summon its own property.
If corporations are legally people [...]
They are clearly not the same as human people. For starters, you can own them as property.
Microsoft Ireland is 100% subject to applicable Irish law.
It is also subject to the orders of its owner, what with it being property and all. So as long a Microsoft US doesn't demand that it do something illegal by Irish law, it has to do whatever Microsoft US tells it to do.
I'm not arguing that you are "wrong" merely that your argument omits the crucial element of property ownership in play.
If so, this boils down to can a court compel a property owner to direct his property to do something (such as forward a document in that properties possession), even if the property happens to be in another country? (one could also substitute "property" for "slave" in that sentence... and
When looked at like that, its not really ridiculous at all.
This is not a case of a court making demands directly of an Irish citizen; which is the possible strawman you erected. This is the case of a court making demands of a US corporation. The nature of that demand is that the US corporation in turn compel its own property in Ireland to do its bidding.
It might seem equivalent in the end, but they are NOT the same thing. For example there is no way the courts in the USA can compel ME to do anything because I am not in the USA, nor am I the legal property of any entity in the USA.
Then it becomes impossible to use them as tax havens.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
This allows Microsoft (and any multi-national) additional power to exempt themselves from various US law by shopping around for favorable laws protecting their digital assets. I'm sure there is at least 1 small, poor, developing, (corrupt?) nation out there that would love to accept a few hundred million dollars to build a datacenter and pass a couple "fuck you America!" laws.
Though I also have to admit the court is not the place to prevent that. There are other ways to deal with this problem. Such as passing laws requiring US companies to submit to this and other US court orders as if all assets were stored in the US as long as US persons have electronic access to those assets. Let the company deal with the trouble of complying with Ireland's laws at the same time as US law (maybe by keeping US customer data in the US and European customer data in Europe)... or split up so they can lawfully and truthfully state "Sorry, Microsoft Corp does not control Microsoft Ireland, Ltd. We just do business with them."... and thus forgo their tax loopholes.
Property ownership of a legal corporate entity doesn't mean that the parent entity can compel the owned entity to break the law. Corporations exist entirely under national laws of incorporation.
And Microsoft, the parent, cannot absolve Microsoft, the child, from the applicable laws.
So if it would be illegal for an Irish citizen to comply with this order without an order from an Irish court ... then Microsoft Ireland if it breaks the laws in Ireland would be pretty much screwed. Microsoft USA can't do an end-run around Irish law just because they can get someone outside of Ireland to do it.
I would sincerely hope Microsoft Ireland would face giant fines, and someone would be sent to jail.
Wholly owned subsidiary is the not the same as property. That wholly owned subsidiary is a legal entity in Ireland which is 100% subject to Irish laws.
Some American court doesn't have the jurisdiction to make that legal entity violate local laws. It's delusional to think otherwise.
Mere whim of the US courts doesn't mean Irish law can be ignored.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
This case is about personal privacy and national sovereignty somewhat, but it's primarily about the setting precedent for the privilege of multinational corporations.
I know this is going to be an unpopular viewpoint, but the industry is behind Microsoft here because it lessens their accountability to any governments anywhere. The Snow Crash future, where big corporations make their own rules and don't answer to anyone, depends on them not having any accountability to anyone else. Just like shuffling their money around the globe gets them out of having to pay taxes anywhere, shuffling their data around will prevent them from even being investigated for any crimes they may commit. Expect future incriminating emails and documents to be stored safely in subpoena-proof countries.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
I wish times were simpler and my country wasn't such a fucking arrogant, pushy, bastard.
The order isn't against any person or entity in Ireland. It is against a US company, and US employees, who can access the data from their desks in the US. Under US law, it is certainly a valid order.
Actually, it likely is not.
A warrant is only applicable to people/places within the jurisdiction of the court that issued the warrant. Microsoft Ireland (which stores the data but does not technically own or control it) and various Irish citizens (who own/control the data) are not under jurisdiction of any US court.
As a subpoena, it's not possible for any Microsoft US employee to comply, because a subpoena only forces you to turn over data/items/evidence that you own/possess...it cannot ask you to turn over items that you do not (otherwise, the government could hand anybody on the street a subpoena to walk into someone's house to gather evidence). No Microsoft US employee owns/possesses the data in question, and whether they have access is not important. What Microsoft needs to do is find somebody in the US who does have legal access to the data and issue them a subpoena.
Property ownership of a legal corporate entity doesn't mean that the parent entity can compel the owned entity to break the law. Corporations exist entirely under national laws of incorporation.
Of course. I never suggested otherwise.
So if it would be illegal for an Irish citizen to comply with this order without an order from an Irish court ...
Are you saying it would be outright illegal for an Irish citizen to forward a document or a copy of it to a court in the United States?
That's a pretty strong claim. I'm not saying you are wrong, data protection laws in the EU are pretty strong; and they may well prevent this particular transfer. And MS, in this particular case, IS asking for a document pertaining to a 3rd party MS services user, not a document belonging to MS itself.
And if it is illegal, then you are quite right, EU/Irish law blocks the request, and there is nothing MS can do about it; other than coordinate with EU law enforcement to get an order through EU courts allowing it.
However in another scenario, where the EU data protection laws don't apply, there might well be nothing wrong at all with what the US courts are trying to do.
As you say, the parent entity cannot compel the owned entity to break the law. But what if the parent entity isn't being asked to compel the owned entity to do something that is illegal. Can the courts do that? Because I find that an interesting question too.
Kind of have to wonder Microsoft et al have other motives (than protecting users) for not wanting the US to be able to get at data stored overseas.
If the US gubberment can get user data stored overseas, it could then perhaps expect to get corporate tax related data stored overseas.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
The US court is not ordering Microsoft Ireland to do anything.
The US court is ordering Microsoft US to supply data which Microsoft US has already stipulated that it has access to.
The fact that Microsoft US gave it to Microsoft Ireland is not the US court's problem.
Microsoft US has already stipulated that it can access the data in question.
TTIP doesnt put the US at an advantage, it puts companies at both sides of the atlantic at advantage against normal people.
A person defies a valid court order? They're arrested and in jail for contempt of court.
Unless that "court order" comes from a completely different country, and ask the person to do something which is absolutely illegal in the current country of that person.
Then the person can laugh and throw the court order in the trash can. (But depending on the "completely different country" 's law, the person's car which was left back there could be seized and destroyed as a retribution).
That's exactly the situation here: A court in the *USA* issues an order to search data in *Ireland*.
No US court has any power to order whatever in the EU. They cannot force anyone in Ireland to do anything. They have no power here.
Not only that, but strict EU laws about data privacy make it *illegal* to do what the US court ask in any country of the EU (and a few other non-EU European countries). If anyone in Ireland were to do what the US asked, they would be thrown in jail for their illegal activities.
Now the court wants to harm Microsoft-US, in retaliation because Microsoft-EU choose to abide to EU-laws and not do what the US court told them to do.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Everbody knows that invading digital privacy across international boundaries is the job of corporations, not governments!
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
And you think that somehow the ruling of a US court absolves Microsoft from Irish law?
Yes but these aren't 2 distinct entities. Does MS Ireland own MS US, or are they wholly separate entities, or does MS US own / control MS Ireland? It would seem the latter. I'm sure there's all kinds of shenanigans done for tax purposes, etc, but its part of MS, nonetheless, and the parent is US based, and under US legal jurisdiction. That said, I hope they loose on this. A really bad precedent would be set and probably be detrimental to long term US business doing anything outside the US.
Property ownership of a legal corporate entity doesn't mean that the parent entity can compel the owned entity to break the law. Corporations exist entirely under national laws of incorporation.
Of course. I never suggested otherwise.
So if it would be illegal for an Irish citizen to comply with this order without an order from an Irish court ...
Are you saying it would be outright illegal for an Irish citizen to forward a document or a copy of it to a court in the United States?
It's already been said: Irish law has stronger privacy protections, and forwarding a private e-mail of a customer would be a breach of said law. It was asked to Irish courts, and Irish courts denied US courts access to said mail without providing probable cause in Irish terms.
So yes, not only it would be outright illegal, but a court has already decided that there's not enough evidence and has forbidden said forwarding.
Anyone in Ireland that complies to said order from the US would be subject to Irish law.
Anyone in the US that gets into Irish servers to extract the information would be subject to Irish law through extradition for comitting a crime (cyber or not) in Ireland.
It's a fucked up situation.
If I own a car located in Sweden, and I'm a US citizen in the US, arrested in the US... can the court compel me to make arrangements to produce for the court something in that car's glove box? I don't actually know...could one? Its not entirely unreasonable to speculate that they could make that demand and then hold me in contempt if I refused to make that arrangement.
Depends on what is the car's glove box.
- If it's something that Sweden doesn't give a damn about (some trivial object), well you could produce it for the court, and the court might be unhappy if you refuse to produce it and actively make obstruction (if the court offer to send a swedish cop to retrieve the object and you refuse to give the key your are kindly asked to provide them, you're the problem)
BUT
- If it's something that is illegal to export out of the country according to Swedish or EU law (weapon, endangered specie, nuclear fuel, etc.), then you CANNOT LEGALLY produce it to the court. What the court is asking you is illegal in Sweden. If you do it anyway, you're going to have big problems with a Swedish court.
According to you, it is also the legal property of Microsoft US. They don't need to compel the Irish to do anything. They can (arguably) simply compel the US entity in their jurisdiction to summon its own property.
Sorry, no. They can't. It's not legal in EU countries (and a few other europeans countries) to move private data around without consent.
Microsoft US cannot summon data in Ireland, without the explicit consent of the data owner. If they move the data anyway, they can be sued in Ireland for it.
While in a foreign country, you cannot commit a crime (under that country's law), even if it's your home country asking for you.
(Otherwise, spying would be entirely legal: because it was done on the order of the spy's home country).
It is also subject to the orders of its owner, what with it being property and all. So as long a Microsoft US doesn't demand that it do something illegal by Irish law, it has to do whatever Microsoft US tells it to do.
But moving private data around without the owner's consent *IS* illegal in most EU and other european countries.
What the US court asks *IS* illegal in Ireland.
and the US court HAS NO power in Ireland. They are giving orders out of their jurisdiction.
If so, this boils down to can a court compel a property owner to direct his property to do something (such as forward a document in that properties possession), even if the property happens to be in another country? (one could also substitute "property" for "slave" in that sentence... and
When looked at like that, its not really ridiculous at all.
Except forwarding that document is absolutely illegal in Ireland.
It works better if you substitute "slave" in that sentence: What if there is no slavery in that country ?! What if all humans are considered free?
This is not a case of a court making demands directly of an Irish citizen; which is the possible strawman you erected.
No, but the data happens to be in Ireland, not in the US. Irish and EU law apply there. Nobody gives a damn shit about US there. Exporting the data IS illegal.
Again let's change the details. Let's take some Extremist / totalitarian government. The goverment asks one of its citizen to assassinate a target (that etremist / totalitarian regime has law that make this request legally binding and mandatory). The citizen then travels to US, and shoots the target: an innocent US citizen - who happen to have angered the government with some publication.
Is the assissnation legal, even if it was ordered according to the law of the extremist government? No, because that government has no jurisdiction in the US. In the US, US-law apply, and you are not allowed to shoot random inocent people, just because some other random dude accros
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Property ownership of a legal corporate entity doesn't mean that the parent entity can compel the owned entity to break the law.
I don't want to quibble over wording, but strictly speaking that isn't true, depending on your definition of "compel." I can compel you to give me everything you own by pointing a gun at somebody you care about and telling you that if you don't send me your money I'll shoot them. It certainly isn't legal, but it IS compulsion. Or at least, I think most people would say that it is.
So, in a sense the US CAN compel MS to make its Irish subsidiary break Irish law, in the sense that practically speaking it has the power to do so. It sucks to be MS in such a case.
This court case is about getting the US government to restrain itself so that it isn't compelling people to break privacy laws.
Countries compel people to break laws all the time, simply because national interests are not always aligned. If country A is at war with country B and captures a spy, do you think country A really cares that country B's laws prevent the spy from divulging their plans? They're going to interrogate that spy and get them to spill their guts all the same, perhaps offering them amnesty if they are sufficiently cooperative.
And you think that somehow the ruling of a US court absolves Microsoft from Irish law?
Not at all, but these statements are not contradictory:
1. US law requires MS to divulge data A, and MS will be punished if they don't divulge it.
2. Irish law requires MS to not divulge data A, and MS will be punished if they do divulge it.
technically and strictly seaking, yes, as they would be violating EU data protection laws, prohibiting transfer of any kind of personal data outside EU, for any processing purpose , and processing being defined as any kind of operation, not limted to computers, without the express permission from all involved. so the issue is verymuch in this case, which law does microsoft chose to break, a us courtorder, or EU data protection law, that carries some pretty substantial and potentially nasty consequences for willful breaches. without an irish court order to this effect, it would be illegal for the irish guy to transfer the data, or let the data be transferred. if he participates or facilitatesthe transfer, he may very well be looking at some jail time. without that irish court order, the guy in ireland is absolutely in his right to refuse honoring the us court order, that has zero validity in ireland.
problem is that MS US will have to ask MS ireland to break the EU/Irish law. you can notwrite a court order that orders you to break the law. no court has such authority, as they would be either operating outside their jurisdiction, or violate the law, making the order invalid. secondly, no US court has any jurisdiction in EU, however wet that dream may be, making the order unenforceable, without an irish court order backing it. as it happens, an irish court said explicitly no to just that, making it nit only illegal, but contempt of the irish courtto comply with the us court order, for any reason, in ireland. ms ireland is thereby legally barred from releasing the data to the us mother company.
I think EU and ireland has some serious objections to that thinking, that us laws apply to ireland or any country in eu. us may have rulings to that effect, but they are just as much worth as a roll of used toilet paper in the other jurisdiction without the support of a court in that very jurisdiction.
technically and strictly seaking, yes, as they would be violating EU data protection laws, prohibiting transfer of any kind of personal data outside EU, for any processing purpose , and processing being defined as any kind of operation, not limted to computers, without the express permission from all involved. so the issue is verymuch in this case
I hear you, but its really not nearly quite so cut and dried. You for example wrote "permission" from all involved, but the EU data directive only requires proper "disclosure". And there are exceptions to that such as if processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest ... etc etc. Is there not a public interest in prosecuting a crime that is an offense in both countries involved? Arguably yes.
Further while the transfer to non-EU countries has a number of restrictions, it is not an outright ban and there are exceptions there too. For example if the 3rd party countries can receive data if that country provides an "adequate level of protection".
Further the EU data protection directive is not a law; it must be enacted in each member state... so what matters is Irelands implementation of it.
All that said, it very well may be illegal. I'm only making the argument that its an open question not, as you seem to presume, automatically and obviously illegal.
If so, this boils down to can a court compel a property owner to direct his property to do something (such as forward a document in that properties possession), even if the property happens to be in another country?
That depends. For example many countries have laws regarding historical artifacts, you can own them but you can't take them out of the country. Or you can legally buy cryptography chips in the US that needs an export license. Just because Microsoft Ireland can legally possess the customer data in Ireland, doesn't mean they're free to ship it around the world or provide access to it in violation of Irish law.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
So you're saying Obama is infallible and that there's no valid way to criticize a black president? That's a bit short sighted. And I didn't see that in the OP post at all. I'm disgusted with my country, and I was before our current president was elected.
That depends. For exampe [...]
Exactly. So you are saying that the US court CAN demand that MS-USA make MS-Ireland turn it over; and **provided** its legal for the MS-Ireland to do so, it would in fact have to do so.
So the question is then not whether MS has the authority to demand that MS-US make MS-Ireland do it. It clearly does as long as its legal for MS-Ireland to comply with its parent corp.
The only question is whether or not it is legal for Ms-Ireland to send the data. See my other replies for more details.
But really, we seem to be in agreement that the US court, can make the order to MS-USA. And in turn that MS-USA can make the order to MS-Ireland.
At this point then its up to MS-Ireland to establish whether or not it can or can't not legally comply.
So why is this argument that they "can't" before the US courts now exactly? This should be MS-Ireland in front of Irish courts seeking clarification. If MS-Ireland thinks it will be illegal to comply it should be able to get the Irish courts to issue an injunction blocking the doctument transfer. Which it can then hand to the US court. End of story.
But that's not what's happening, instead of we have a media circus US blaring that that the US is trying to compel MS Ireland to break the law, and arguing that they trumping the laws of a foreign country etc... which they are not.
For example, to use your example, if an historic artifact belonged to Microsoft which needed government approval to exit the country, then Microsoft could order MS-USA to submit it as evidence -- there is nothing wrong with that. And that is what has happened here. Why is it a big deal?
Ireland, if it doesn't want the evidence to leave the country would in response issue an injunction preventing the transfer; or deny the application to transfer it out, or whatever the process is. And MS-USA would present that denial to the court.
Why hasn't that happened here?
They are not operating above the law. But the law in question here is _Irish_ law, not US law. The US prosecutor is doing things that in earlier times would have caused a major international incident, possibly a war.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I didn't see anything racist in what he said, just because he thinks his country is on the wrong path, and that country currently happens to have a black president doesn't make him racist.
Do you honestly feel that while we have a black president the government should be beyond reproach because anything said against its actions is racist?
Do you think that his statement even meant, "Things were so much better 6 years ago when we had W"? 'Cause I am pretty sure it didn't.
If the US can't enforce it's laws against content stored off shore, even if owned by an on-shore company, then what about the reverse? How can the DMCA be enforced against those in foreign countries? If Microsoft says that Irish law prevails because that is where the data is stored, then wouldn't the same be true for DMCA violations?
You can't have it both ways. Pirate Bay had it's data on foreign soil, but American companies had no problem with using American laws there. Of course, many countries have treatise with the US, but not all. If Microsoft wins this, do they create a big loophole?
Go Microsoft!!!
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
If the DOJ needs data stored in Ireland, why not ask Ireland first? It's not exactly a safe heaven for drug trafficking. I am sure they'd extradite a drug dealer. So they would release any data in drug trafficking case. DOJ just wants to prove that they shouldn't have to ask?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Things are fucked up.
Obama is no better than Bush or Clinton, or any of the last 20 presidents. America once stood for integrity. America is now synonymous with corruption, greed, and outright dishonesty, and thought of more as a possible invader than anything else.
I am dead set on opposing criminal activity in contravention of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Those document were put into place by learned men and when followed, proved quite good at restraining the more vile excesses. Unfortunately, they have been ignored for far too long.
So go fuck off with all your bullshit about racism. And fuck you too, for automatically assuming that everyone posting on SlashDot is Caucasian, you arrogantly stupid ass.
I think you wasted your time with that reply. That sort will always play a race card. It's what they learned from their parent(s).
War? You mean, like, with weapons and shit?
Don't be silly. Today you don't go to a "hot" war with an enemy of similar strength, with a coequal opponent you go for an economic style of war. Literally so.
The goal is not to bomb them back into the stone age. Only to fleece them. I.e. pretty much what has been going on the past decade or so.
Welcome to the new war.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"ms ireland is thereby legally barred from releasing the data to the us mother company."
That is not the US court's problem. That is MS US and MS Ireland's problem for setting up up their multinational corporation to try to evade national laws. They deliberately entered an arrangement where they could not comply with the laws of their respective jurisdictions.