Court Ruling Shows The Internet Does Have Borders After All (csoonline.com)

itwbennett writes: Microsoft's recent victory in court, when it was ruled that the physical location of the company's servers in Ireland were out of reach of the U.S. government, was described on Slashdot as being "perceived as a major victory for privacy." But J. Trevor Hughes, president and CEO of the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) has a different view of the implications of the ruling that speaks to John Perry Barlow's vision of an independent cyberspace: "By recognizing the jurisdictional boundaries of Ireland, it is possible that the Second Circuit Court created an incentive for other jurisdictions to require data to be held within their national boundaries. We have seen similar laws emerge in Russia -- they fall under a policy trend towards 'data localization' that has many cloud service and global organizations deeply concerned. Which leads to a tough question: what happens if every country tries to assert jurisdictional control over the web? Might we end up with a fractured web, a 'splinternet,' of lessening utility?"

Comments

I'll take the bait

[guruevi]

No, we just end up with these large corporations splitting up in entities that are harder to control (and tax). Microsoft will just transfer it's "data assets" to Microsoft Farawayistan just like it does with it's taxes to Microsoft Ireland. We may end up with all of the major data centers in South America, Japan and Eastern Europe and thus a shift of both tech, brains and money to countries that don't put up with idiotic lawmakers.

Actually, I've seen a vision of how it turns out.

[Narcocide]

Turns out this is the setting of the world in which your character lives in Megaman Battle Network 2 (Nintendo GBA). Its not really the plot, but as a setting for a world it makes some interesting but subtle social commentary. First of all, it just assumes this is the "right way" for the internet to work and that it always has been thus, and doesn't debate it with you. You're along for the ride in a world where:

1) Just connecting to the internet in another country requires a Passport.
2) The internet is not as safe in every country. In fact, they're all incrementally more dangerous than your home country's internet.
3) The space on the internet between country jurisdictional borders is very hostile.
4) Viruses roam freely, attacking anything in their sight. Nobody seems to know why they are there. They just take for granted that they must always have been there or are naturally occurring.

The 90s called and want their cyberspace back

[Kjella]

Remember when tech pundits were talking like the Internet would transcend to become it's own nation that people would emigrate to and live in? Well shit turns out we still live in meatspace with countries and laws. And surprise, surprise so does our data. The cloud is just the new buzzword for the same concept without the people. I suppose companies will try to go jurisdiction shopping, but I doubt they'll succeed. The governments of the world will set requirements for dealing with their citizen's data and you'll either comply or get in legal trouble, like the EU's "right to be forgotten". Yes, it means data on the Chinese might stay in China but it might also mean data on US citizens stay in the US. Would you really like them to swap? Or do you just want to fulfill the NSAs wet dream that all data on everyone in the whole world go through the US? Seriously, for most of us local data is a good thing.

Incentives

[edjs]

"it is possible that the Second Circuit Court created an incentive for other jurisdictions to require data to be held within their national boundaries"

No, the PATRIOT act and related laws regarding the (lack of) privacy for data held in the US did that ages ago.