4 ms·
> Electronically transferring data from a server in a foreign country to Google’s data center in California does not amount to a “seizure” because there is no m
by drakenot 10y ago
> Electronically transferring data from a server in a foreign country to Google’s data center in California does not amount to a “seizure” because there is no meaningful interference with the account holder’s possessory interest in the user data.
So, because data can be copied and doesn't deprive the original account holder of their data, this doesn't count as a seizure?
> the electronic data disclosed by Google pursuant to the warrants will occur in the United States when the FBI reviews the copies of the requested data in Pennsylvania.
And because law enforcement will review the documents in the United States, this doesn't count as a "search" outside the US.
This line of reasoning seems really crazy to me. What if these had been physical documents? Would this have been ruled in the same way? Say that the US government photocopied a set of files outside the United States and planned to only review them in the US.
- Spivak 10y agoOn the upside, I can't wait to cite this case whenever someone says that piracy is theft.
- segmondy 10y agoThey said it's not seizure, they didn't say it's theft. Argument for piracy has been that it's not depriving the original owner of the content, but that has been argued against. So I'm not sure your argument will hold.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoYes, the crime is copyright infringement, not theft, even if movie studios like to spin the former as a form of the latter.
- ezoe 10y agoSurely, the content of almost all emails express human philosophy enough to be accounted the copyright.
- kahnpro 10y agoIt's not a crime. Stop calling it that. Copyright infringement is a civil offence. You get sued by a movie studio for money, not prosecuted by the state and imprisoned. But the industry is working to change that...
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoFair point, though it depends on your jurisdiction.
- manquer 10y agoThere is another interesting question .Who owns the emails ? Google ? Account holder ?.. can the account holder claim IP infringement ?
- manquer 10y agoThere is another interesting question .Who owns the emails ? Google ? Account holder ?.. can the account holder claim IP infringement ?
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago>Electronically transferring a movie from a server in a foreign country to one's home in California does not amount to pirating because there is no meaningful interference with the original movie holder’s possessory interest in the movie.
- jaclaz 10y agoMaybe handy in that case ;): http://www.funnymotivationalposters.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Piracy.jpg http://www.funnymotivationalposters.info/wp-content/uploads/...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- devoply 10y agoAmerican courts and judges leave much to be desired by non-Americans in terms of justice. The only reason they get away with it is power.
- bigiain 10y agoAnd because we non-Americans are so eager to use gmail/facebook/twitter et al...
- rocqua 10y agoThe court relied on the fact that google already copies data between datacentres (I suspect across borders as well). This means there isn't a lot of meaning to google copying data across borders on an order. I'd feel very different if google was strict about keeping data within international borders.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- sixothree 10y ago> “[N]o seizure occurs if a package is detained in a manner that does not significantly interfere with its timely delivery in the normal course of business.” Even crazier.
- kartan 10y ago> Electronically transferring data from a server in a foreign country to Google’s data center in California does not amount to a “seizure” I can see that that's what the US justice things about it. But what will happen to Google in the country of origin? I can rule that it is legal to kidnap criminals from another countries, but that doesn't means that you are not breaking their laws.