Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Email Privacy Case No Longer Needed, Says The US (cnn.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CNN:
The U.S. Department of Justice is asking the Supreme Court to abandon its case against Microsoft over international data privacy. A new law signed by President Donald Trump last week answers the legal question at the heart of Microsoft's case, the DOJ says. So the case "is now moot," the department said in a court filing posted Saturday.
Microsoft's legal battle began in 2013, when it refused to hand over emails stored on a server in Ireland to US officials who were investigating drug trafficking. Microsoft argued at the time that sharing data stored abroad could violate international treaties and policies, and there was no law on the books to provide any clarity. That changed with the The Cloud Act, which was tucked into the spending bill that Trump signed March 23. The act establishes a legal pathway for the United States to form agreements with other nations that make it easier for law enforcement to collect data stored on foreign soil... Microsoft cheered the new law, saying the Cloud Act provides the legal clarity the company sought.
The ACLU's legislative counsel argues that the new act hurts privacy and human rights, "at a time when human rights activists, dissidents and journalists around the world face unprecedented attacks."
"Would even a well-intentioned technology company, particularly a small one, have the expertise and resources to competently assess the risk that a foreign order may pose to a particular human rights activist?"
Microsoft's legal battle began in 2013, when it refused to hand over emails stored on a server in Ireland to US officials who were investigating drug trafficking. Microsoft argued at the time that sharing data stored abroad could violate international treaties and policies, and there was no law on the books to provide any clarity. That changed with the The Cloud Act, which was tucked into the spending bill that Trump signed March 23. The act establishes a legal pathway for the United States to form agreements with other nations that make it easier for law enforcement to collect data stored on foreign soil... Microsoft cheered the new law, saying the Cloud Act provides the legal clarity the company sought.
The ACLU's legislative counsel argues that the new act hurts privacy and human rights, "at a time when human rights activists, dissidents and journalists around the world face unprecedented attacks."
"Would even a well-intentioned technology company, particularly a small one, have the expertise and resources to competently assess the risk that a foreign order may pose to a particular human rights activist?"
So yeah, moot.
This new law may prove to be unconstitutional - even with a conservative-leaning court in place.
#DeleteChrome
You were warned.
You are welcome on my lawn.
At one time, I was surprised by Microsoft's approach: defending their customer's privacy.
Now they are selling them out. I don't think that this is a good business decision: it will dissuade non-US customers from using Microsoft's services.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Nother April Foos shitty ass joke!
Definition of moot
1 a : open to question : debatable
b : subjected to discussion :
But instead we get this version of moot:
2 : deprived of practical significance : made abstract or purely academic
Thanks a lot Rick Springfield, you screwed a word by making it opposite of itself. I’m happy you didn’t get Jessie’s girl.
A spending bill that was so big he said "He would never sign another one like it again."
. . . until the next time that the government runs out of money again.
Over time, Congressional spending bills only get larger . . . they never get smaller.
Presidents always try to put a lid on spending . . . but those wily Congress Critters gotta bring home the pork for their constituencies! Bow & Arrow Tax Breaks, et al.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
"Would even a well-intentioned technology company, particularly a small one, have the expertise and resources to competently assess the risk that a foreign order may pose to a particular human rights activist?
Why would such assessments be left to the companies? It's the governments that form the agreements, not the companies.
The General Data Protection Regulation will be enforced in the EU very soon. It is a regulation that is specifically aimed at protecting the data of natural persons. Here is the text in english if you want to read it
There will be enormous conflicts between the GDPR and this law passed by the US congress.
It might take a while to fight this out in courts but i think this will probably lead to a ban of personal data transfer from european companies to any USA owned entity in a few years.
The other country says no !.
Which most of the EU appears to be obliged to do under local laws.
...I wonder who will trust their cloud after this. Talk about shooting your feet clean off.
God damn you are a fucking idiot deflecting things as badly as the Russian trolls/Ivans around here! Guess who actually added the rider which is disputed here? Rep. Collins, Doug [R-GA-9]" - an exclusively conservative Republican from Georgia. Pointing out who and especially which party is genuinely responsive for an instance of rights violations is crucial for acting against it in a way that politicians actually feel and fear.
The land of the free readying a platform to export freedom suppressing laws. I thought America was about protecting freedom.
I wonder if anyone will notice?
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
This is how MS do things that make me think they suck, pull as much PR goodwill value from it as possible and then drop their true intent and meaning, expansion of their cloud business internationally.
Interesting times for MS, Windows is out, Cloud is in, Windows Senior Product Lead gone, C# programmer for .Net working on Typescript, WSL for Linux and Ubuntu.
So what's next? Time to jump ship and transition plan it's EEE over Linux, the biggest one yet, For All is Cloud!
Interesting times.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Burn it all down, or leave. Make your choice soon because it is a time limited opportunity.
On the positive side this law acknowledged that the US needs the permission of the country where the data is stored. Writing a law that states the obvious is not the same as fixing the problem. At least Microsoft and other US companies are no longer in the position of violating the laws of a country no matter what they do. Getting international agreement on this may be very difficult.
As bad as this may sound, remember that the left is even worse. Remember SOPA and PIPA under Obama and championed by Hillary?
Don't forget, and don't let the left brainwash you with revisionist history and mass media echo chambers, but Communism and Socialism (e.g. National Socialism -Nazism) are flavors of the left. With them you will lose EVERYTHING. History is a bitch aint it??? Look no further than Cuba and Venezuela to see the spectacular successes of leftist ideaology.
RIAA & Hollywood seems they think this can be use to protect IP.
This law, as I understand it, allows the U.S. government to enter into agreements with foreign governments to allow the U.S. to request the foreign governments to compel U.S. companies to hand over data to U.S. law enforcement when they have a warrant. But what is to stop privacy minded companies from setting up their data centers in countries which do NOT enter into such agreements?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Man, you guys really hate facts.
Obama had 8 years of office, and never gave undocumented immigrants their citizenship.
Downmod away! I can tell the closer I get to the truth, the more you react with votes instead of facts.
god damn you are a fucking retarded idiot