I am missing the part where this is a victory against U.S. surveillance. Why would U.S. surveillance care where the data sits? In fact it'd be much easier to ha

I am missing the part where this is a victory against U.S. surveillance. Why would U.S. surveillance care where the data sits? In fact it'd be much easier to have the allies pick up the data in their home country -- plus there are less complications. Hell, I'd call it a win. Yep, it's a hit on operations for large companies. But it's not the end of the world. Lots of cash and severe growth mode means they'll just use lawyers to stall while they do some major re-architecture work over the next few years. Not a disaster. The loss is for small/medium U.S. companies -- the kind of companies that go on to be Facebooks. The kind we need to make the economy grow. They're in a hell of a mess. They don't have the cash or momentum to weather the storm, and competitors overseas are now sitting pretty on a more locked-up local market. As far as I can tell, this article has exactly nothing to do with U.S. surveillance. In fact, the results of the ruling, if anything, could be said to have exactly opposite effects of those promised in the headline. (Geesh, WP)