4 ms·

Pushing this way of thinking about it, you could also say that a raid from the police is useless in general since a judge can simply send a request compelling t

by Joky 9y ago

Pushing this way of thinking about it, you could also say that a raid from the police is useless in general since a judge can simply send a request compelling the company to turn over the evidence in the first place.

Consultant32452 9y ago
Yes, a raid, in this case, is almost certainly an abuse of force and an attempt to create social/emotional problems for Uber.
jimktrains2 9y ago
And shouldn't that be the case? Shouldn't a raid be a last resort when the evidence being sought is at high risk of disappearing?
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  There is no suggestion at this point that data is disappearing. HN is so weird sometimes. When Google, or Facebook, or whoever grants the authorities free access to our private data without a warrant everyone freaks out. Uber protects our private data and suddenly it's evil. I get that we don't like Uber, but principles still matter and I'm glad they are protecting their own data as well as any customer data from a fishing expedition by the authorities. Now if Uber destroys or refuses to provide data covered under a properly scoped warrant, then I will gladly pick up the pitch fork with you.
ethbro 9y ago
A judge "can simply simply a request compelling the company to turn over evidence" in what jurisdiction? My understanding of the majority of warrants are that they have a nebulous grasp on transnational corporations. For example: if I (the police) have a French warrant and serve it on the Paris offices of Uber, but Uber has a pager service that performs whole disk encryption and sends the keys to a server in Panama, where does that leave me? The French government isn't going to raise a diplomatic ruckus over a taxi company operating illegally in Paris. And I'd strongly suspect a judge wouldn't be inclined to allow me to forceably repatriate the data (which data?) without further evidence (exactly why I was serving the warrant!). So essentially, I don't see it as being technologically hard to construct a system where I am enabled to operate illegally in a country, as a matter of corporately-sanctioned policy, while skirting around local technical ability and federal legal will to call me to account.
- DanBC 9y ago
  The warrant is to "make the data available". You can try saying "lol, the data is in Panama", but the judge is unlikely to care about that.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  >For example: if I (the police) have a French warrant and serve it on the Paris offices of Uber, but Uber has a pager service that performs whole disk encryption and sends the keys to a server in Panama, where does that leave me? The court will simply order you to cease all business functions in France until the data is provided to the court.
  - ethbro 9y ago
    It's not that simple. I am not a lawyer, but... At least for US law, there are split decisions. US v Microsoft (the Ireland case) [1] is currently pending a Supreme Court ruling. I'd hazard to say that I'd be surprised if they didn't rule in favor of national security concerns, except that Jesner v. Arab Bank [2] is coincidentally also pending. Given that the latter concerns the Alien Tort Statute [3], aka the ability of US law to be applied internationally, it will be an interesting pair of decisions. I'm not familiar with how things work in France (other than rough knowledge of EU data privacy directives), but at least in the US things aren't as simple as "what the legal system wants via warrant, the legal system gets." [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._United_St... [2] https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-499 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-499 [3] Subject of a fascinating episode of More Perfect, https://www.wnyc.org/story/enemy-of-mankind/ https://www.wnyc.org/story/enemy-of-mankind/
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      For the Ireland case we're talking about data about a third party criminal whose data happens to be stored by MSFT exclusively in another country. That's not the case here with Uber. Uber itself, a Canadian company subject to Canadian law, is being compelled to provide data relevant to its own business within Canada. I would be very surprised if Canada allowed businesses to not provide relevant financial information to the tax man.

by Joky 9y ago

Consultant32452 9y ago

Yes, a raid, in this case, is almost certainly an abuse of force and an attempt to create social/emotional problems for Uber.

jimktrains2 9y ago

And shouldn't that be the case? Shouldn't a raid be a last resort when the evidence being sought is at high risk of disappearing?

Consultant32452 9y ago
There is no suggestion at this point that data is disappearing. HN is so weird sometimes. When Google, or Facebook, or whoever grants the authorities free access to our private data without a warrant everyone freaks out. Uber protects our private data and suddenly it's evil. I get that we don't like Uber, but principles still matter and I'm glad they are protecting their own data as well as any customer data from a fishing expedition by the authorities. Now if Uber destroys or refuses to provide data covered under a properly scoped warrant, then I will gladly pick up the pitch fork with you.

ethbro 9y ago

A judge "can simply simply a request compelling the company to turn over evidence" in what jurisdiction? My understanding of the majority of warrants are that they have a nebulous grasp on transnational corporations. For example: if I (the police) have a French warrant and serve it on the Paris offices of Uber, but Uber has a pager service that performs whole disk encryption and sends the keys to a server in Panama, where does that leave me? The French government isn't going to raise a diplomatic ruckus over a taxi company operating illegally in Paris. And I'd strongly suspect a judge wouldn't be inclined to allow me to forceably repatriate the data (which data?) without further evidence (exactly why I was serving the warrant!). So essentially, I don't see it as being technologically hard to construct a system where I am enabled to operate illegally in a country, as a matter of corporately-sanctioned policy, while skirting around local technical ability and federal legal will to call me to account.

DanBC 9y ago
The warrant is to "make the data available". You can try saying "lol, the data is in Panama", but the judge is unlikely to care about that.
Consultant32452 9y ago
>For example: if I (the police) have a French warrant and serve it on the Paris offices of Uber, but Uber has a pager service that performs whole disk encryption and sends the keys to a server in Panama, where does that leave me? The court will simply order you to cease all business functions in France until the data is provided to the court.
- ethbro 9y ago
  It's not that simple. I am not a lawyer, but... At least for US law, there are split decisions. US v Microsoft (the Ireland case) [1] is currently pending a Supreme Court ruling. I'd hazard to say that I'd be surprised if they didn't rule in favor of national security concerns, except that Jesner v. Arab Bank [2] is coincidentally also pending. Given that the latter concerns the Alien Tort Statute [3], aka the ability of US law to be applied internationally, it will be an interesting pair of decisions. I'm not familiar with how things work in France (other than rough knowledge of EU data privacy directives), but at least in the US things aren't as simple as "what the legal system wants via warrant, the legal system gets." [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._United_St... [2] https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-499 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-499 [3] Subject of a fascinating episode of More Perfect, https://www.wnyc.org/story/enemy-of-mankind/ https://www.wnyc.org/story/enemy-of-mankind/
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    For the Ireland case we're talking about data about a third party criminal whose data happens to be stored by MSFT exclusively in another country. That's not the case here with Uber. Uber itself, a Canadian company subject to Canadian law, is being compelled to provide data relevant to its own business within Canada. I would be very surprised if Canada allowed businesses to not provide relevant financial information to the tax man.