4 ms·

Uh... You can't send a national security letter to a foreign company that has no presence in the US. Well, you can probably send it, but since the foreign compa

by raquo 10y ago

Uh... You can't send a national security letter to a foreign company that has no presence in the US. Well, you can probably send it, but since the foreign company is not bound by US laws, they can ignore it and even publish it (this is my understanding, IANAL). The whole point of this Russian law is to remove this limitation.

Vehren_ 10y ago
I guess the question is what qualifies as presence in your view. LinkedIn has a presence in Russia due to it's Russian clientele, that's why Kremlin is going after them in the first place. This is only party relevant, but in the past few years the US started going after people solely based on the fact that they have some money in a US bank (and no other ties, i.e. 'presence'). So now you have the US Federal court in Brooklyn prosecuting the FIFA corruption scandal. The original point stands, I think. If a state actor has interest in your affairs, they will find legal ways to spy on you, or create new laws so they can. Honestly, the NSA scandal, and the gross violation of personal privacy in the US after 9/11 should have taught people that. And the US is the bastion of modern democracy (saying this w/o sarcasm) to boot.
devoply 10y ago
The State department has gone after companies that had no US presence, they did so on the basis of Americans using the website which they feel gives them jurisdiction. It's very similar to that.
- raquo 10y ago
  What are some of those companies? I'd be curious to read about that. Because it doesn't sound like the state dept. has any legal basis here, just American specialism. At any rate, US is not the bastion of freedom that Russia's actions should be compared to. Especially so when it involves three-letter agencies. To clarify the distinction I'm trying to make - yes, US doing some shady shit, mostly trying to keep it in secret. Russia is explicitly legalizing such shady shit. And doing even shadier shit in secret.

by raquo 10y ago

Vehren_ 10y ago

I guess the question is what qualifies as presence in your view. LinkedIn has a presence in Russia due to it's Russian clientele, that's why Kremlin is going after them in the first place. This is only party relevant, but in the past few years the US started going after people solely based on the fact that they have some money in a US bank (and no other ties, i.e. 'presence'). So now you have the US Federal court in Brooklyn prosecuting the FIFA corruption scandal. The original point stands, I think. If a state actor has interest in your affairs, they will find legal ways to spy on you, or create new laws so they can. Honestly, the NSA scandal, and the gross violation of personal privacy in the US after 9/11 should have taught people that. And the US is the bastion of modern democracy (saying this w/o sarcasm) to boot.

devoply 10y ago

The State department has gone after companies that had no US presence, they did so on the basis of Americans using the website which they feel gives them jurisdiction. It's very similar to that.

raquo 10y ago
What are some of those companies? I'd be curious to read about that. Because it doesn't sound like the state dept. has any legal basis here, just American specialism. At any rate, US is not the bastion of freedom that Russia's actions should be compared to. Especially so when it involves three-letter agencies. To clarify the distinction I'm trying to make - yes, US doing some shady shit, mostly trying to keep it in secret. Russia is explicitly legalizing such shady shit. And doing even shadier shit in secret.