6 ms·

> In fact, it's kind of insensitive for foreigners to suggest that a judge of a sovereign nation must consider US law in his rulings. My apologies, but I think

> In fact, it's kind of insensitive for foreigners to suggest that a judge of a sovereign nation must consider US law in his rulings. My apologies, but I think that if you re-read what was written, you will find that this was not suggested. The comment was written in response to one that came to the conclusion that this "was all [WhatsApp's] fault." It is suggesting that WhatsApp is not at fault, is probably strictly complying with US law, and cannot share the information in any case. At no point does it even come close to suggesting that the judge in the case should have "considered US law" in his rulings. Moreover, I feel that your claim does not clearly differentiate between 'considering US law' as a material fact and 'considering US law' as a judicial precedent. You seem to be suggesting that someone arguing that US law ought to be held material to the case is somehow demanding that the Brazilian judiciary hold itself subservient to the US courts. You also seem to be suggesting that a Brazilian state judge has any business interpreting the law so as to "send a message" to the government of another nation, which is simply and patently untrue.

danvet 10y ago
Complying or not complying to a foreing judges orders is a pretty common problem for any multinational company. Even if they have local presensence, the thing requested (data, object, whatever) might be somewhere else. And simply fetching it across a border on a foreign judges order can get you into trouble for "aiding a foreign power" and stuff like that. It's worse that most local judges simple don't know that there's even a problem, and even if that'a clear to them, the judge most likely has 0 experience in making a successful request to the foreign state. And since all bureaucrats if the request isn't perfect it falls through the cracks. So often (at least if you're locally present) your laywers will need to help the judge to draft and push such a request through. Long story short: These jurisdictional issues are not at all US specific, it's everywhere. Sovereign states just don't like it all over if their citizens and companies do stuff within their borders under orders of a foreign state.
Freak_NL 10y ago
Huge international US-based companies tend to comply with EU laws just fine (or at least participate in the judicial process) if they are doing business there. Whatsapp can choose to assign resources to this issue, or it can ignore it and let it solve itself. If Whatsapp thinks that Brazil is an interesting market for whatever it is selling (what are they selling?) or if it is good for PR then they may choose to seek ways to intervene.
- simonh 10y ago
  > Huge international US-based companies tend to comply with EU laws just fine When they are operating their business within the EU, yes. For example US companies operating servers in the EU must comply with EU data protection laws regarding information on those servers. This situation is analogous. WhatsApp's servers are in the US so US law applies. If the servers were in the EU then EU law would apply, not Brazilian law.
  - markokrajnc 10y ago
    But by the US laws the US company has to share information information on those servers located in EU with US government if requested...
    - simonh 10y ago
      Which of course is bonkers. But that doesn't mean it's OK for a Brazilian judge to be similarly bonkers.
  - tremon 10y ago
    US companies operating servers in the EU must comply with EU data protection laws regarding information on those servers. More accurately, US companies processing personal data of EU citizens must comply with EU data protection laws. It just so happens that locating the servers in the EU is among the easiest ways to comply with that.
    - simonh 10y ago
      Right, because the personal information is being transmitted outside the EU. Even if it's from a browser in the EU to a server in the US, that still counts. It's still an activity taking place in the EU. The Brazilian case isn't about data transmission though. WhatsApp isn't in breach of any rules about that. It's about court ordered access to records stored on an server in a specific geographic location - The USA. Now if the Brazilian government passed a law requiring WhatsApp to record all data on servers in Brazil that would at least be possible to comply with.
devishard 10y ago
> You seem to be suggesting that someone arguing that US law ought to be held material to the case is somehow demanding that the Brazilian judiciary hold itself subservient to the US courts. Allowing a company to break Brazilian law because US law demands that the company break Brazilian law would absolutely put the Brazilian judiciary in a subservient position to US law. > You also seem to be suggesting that a Brazilian state judge has any business interpreting the law so as to "send a message" to the government of another nation, which is simply and patently untrue. Brazil decides what is and is not the business of Brazilian state judges.

danvet 10y ago

Complying or not complying to a foreing judges orders is a pretty common problem for any multinational company. Even if they have local presensence, the thing requested (data, object, whatever) might be somewhere else. And simply fetching it across a border on a foreign judges order can get you into trouble for "aiding a foreign power" and stuff like that. It's worse that most local judges simple don't know that there's even a problem, and even if that'a clear to them, the judge most likely has 0 experience in making a successful request to the foreign state. And since all bureaucrats if the request isn't perfect it falls through the cracks. So often (at least if you're locally present) your laywers will need to help the judge to draft and push such a request through. Long story short: These jurisdictional issues are not at all US specific, it's everywhere. Sovereign states just don't like it all over if their citizens and companies do stuff within their borders under orders of a foreign state.

Freak_NL 10y ago

Huge international US-based companies tend to comply with EU laws just fine (or at least participate in the judicial process) if they are doing business there. Whatsapp can choose to assign resources to this issue, or it can ignore it and let it solve itself. If Whatsapp thinks that Brazil is an interesting market for whatever it is selling (what are they selling?) or if it is good for PR then they may choose to seek ways to intervene.

simonh 10y ago
> Huge international US-based companies tend to comply with EU laws just fine When they are operating their business within the EU, yes. For example US companies operating servers in the EU must comply with EU data protection laws regarding information on those servers. This situation is analogous. WhatsApp's servers are in the US so US law applies. If the servers were in the EU then EU law would apply, not Brazilian law.
- markokrajnc 10y ago
  But by the US laws the US company has to share information information on those servers located in EU with US government if requested...
  - simonh 10y ago
    Which of course is bonkers. But that doesn't mean it's OK for a Brazilian judge to be similarly bonkers.
- tremon 10y ago
  US companies operating servers in the EU must comply with EU data protection laws regarding information on those servers. More accurately, US companies processing personal data of EU citizens must comply with EU data protection laws. It just so happens that locating the servers in the EU is among the easiest ways to comply with that.
  - simonh 10y ago
    Right, because the personal information is being transmitted outside the EU. Even if it's from a browser in the EU to a server in the US, that still counts. It's still an activity taking place in the EU. The Brazilian case isn't about data transmission though. WhatsApp isn't in breach of any rules about that. It's about court ordered access to records stored on an server in a specific geographic location - The USA. Now if the Brazilian government passed a law requiring WhatsApp to record all data on servers in Brazil that would at least be possible to comply with.

devishard 10y ago

> You seem to be suggesting that someone arguing that US law ought to be held material to the case is somehow demanding that the Brazilian judiciary hold itself subservient to the US courts. Allowing a company to break Brazilian law because US law demands that the company break Brazilian law would absolutely put the Brazilian judiciary in a subservient position to US law. > You also seem to be suggesting that a Brazilian state judge has any business interpreting the law so as to "send a message" to the government of another nation, which is simply and patently untrue. Brazil decides what is and is not the business of Brazilian state judges.