4 ms·

This is a very important case. If the SCOTUS rules in favor of the US then corps which are active in both the US and the EU will be stuck having to decide who’s

by ahakki 9y ago

This is a very important case. If the SCOTUS rules in favor of the US then corps which are active in both the US and the EU will be stuck having to decide who’s laws to follow. Unilateral extraterritorial application of domestic laws is rarely a good idea, especially when a bilateral mutual legal assistance treaty already exists (which the US didn’t use in this case). The following amicus briefs are a good read introduction to the case: Brief amici curiae of Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie e.V., Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag e.V., Ibec clg, Konfederacja Lewiatan, and Mouvement des Enterprises de France filed. (Distributed) http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/27520/20180111125139649_17-2.AMICUS.FINAL.pdf http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/27520/20180111... Brief amicus curiae of European Commission on Behalf of the European Union in support of neither party filed. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/23633/20171213113332456_17-2%20Amicus%20Brief%20in%20Support%20of%20Neither%20Party.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/23633/2017121... ——— These are way to long to read completly, but already a quick browse can be enlightening: Brief of petitioner United States filed. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/22902/20171206191900398_17-2tsUnitedStates.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/22902/2017120... Brief of respondent Microsoft Corporation filed. (Distributed) Jan 17 2018 https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/27619/20180111205746909_Brief%20for%20Respondent%202018.01.11.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/27619/2018011... ——— HN Readers might also enjoy this one: Brief amicus curiae of 51 COMPUTER SCIENTISTS filed: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/28101/20180117133756823_FILE-Amicus%20Brief-US%20v%20Microsoft%20No.%2017-2.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/17/17-2/28101/2018011...

xigency 9y ago
There's no reason to believe a multinational corporation can roll out a service globally and maintain it consistently with all nations's laws. See for example Google in China. They could always segment their services or be split into multiple companies. Although it would be convenient to live in a legally consistent world, I think we are in a much better situation than hundreds of years ago, when the largest corporation had its own laws, its own army, and the ability to carry out the death penalty.
- ahakki 9y ago
  > See for example Google in China. Yes, Google’s Services in China are adapted to local laws. But China only applies those laws inside it’s territory. China is not demanding that Google block “Tank Man”-Videos outside of China. The US wants to apply the Stored Communications Act outside of it’s territory (In casu to Ireland).
  - CamperBob2 9y ago
    The US wants to apply the Stored Communications Act outside of it’s territory (In casu to Ireland). Devil's-advocate point of view: if SCOTUS decides in Microsoft's favor, won't that give them carte blance to play "keep away" with any data sought by law enforcement? Any potentially-sensitive data would presumably be stored outside the US's borders in that case, in a country with laws sympathetic to the company's interests. I just don't see a good argument to be made for allowing a company chartered under US law to behave this way. IMO, if Microsoft has the ability to access the data, then they have the responsibility to turn it over in response to a legitimate court order. The fact that they chose to store the data on a server in Ireland, a server in Washington, or a server in orbit around Mars seems immaterial. If it's under their control, it's under their control.
    - merb 9y ago
      > Any potentially-sensitive data would presumably be stored outside the US's borders in that case, in a country with laws sympathetic to the company's interests. I just don't see a good argument to be made for allowing a company chartered under US law to behave this way. well currently than they need to search a country that would not coporate. Currently if some bad guy would store sensitive/illegal or whatever data in germany and the us would come and ask for it, the german law enforcement would check if the request (would meet all requirements in the german law for data search, etc) is valid and if it would, they would hand over the data. that's how it should happen and how it actually happens to some extent.
      - CamperBob2 9y ago

by ahakki 9y ago

xigency 9y ago

There's no reason to believe a multinational corporation can roll out a service globally and maintain it consistently with all nations's laws. See for example Google in China. They could always segment their services or be split into multiple companies. Although it would be convenient to live in a legally consistent world, I think we are in a much better situation than hundreds of years ago, when the largest corporation had its own laws, its own army, and the ability to carry out the death penalty.

ahakki 9y ago
> See for example Google in China. Yes, Google’s Services in China are adapted to local laws. But China only applies those laws inside it’s territory. China is not demanding that Google block “Tank Man”-Videos outside of China. The US wants to apply the Stored Communications Act outside of it’s territory (In casu to Ireland).
- CamperBob2 9y ago
  The US wants to apply the Stored Communications Act outside of it’s territory (In casu to Ireland). Devil's-advocate point of view: if SCOTUS decides in Microsoft's favor, won't that give them carte blance to play "keep away" with any data sought by law enforcement? Any potentially-sensitive data would presumably be stored outside the US's borders in that case, in a country with laws sympathetic to the company's interests. I just don't see a good argument to be made for allowing a company chartered under US law to behave this way. IMO, if Microsoft has the ability to access the data, then they have the responsibility to turn it over in response to a legitimate court order. The fact that they chose to store the data on a server in Ireland, a server in Washington, or a server in orbit around Mars seems immaterial. If it's under their control, it's under their control.
  - merb 9y ago
    > Any potentially-sensitive data would presumably be stored outside the US's borders in that case, in a country with laws sympathetic to the company's interests. I just don't see a good argument to be made for allowing a company chartered under US law to behave this way. well currently than they need to search a country that would not coporate. Currently if some bad guy would store sensitive/illegal or whatever data in germany and the us would come and ask for it, the german law enforcement would check if the request (would meet all requirements in the german law for data search, etc) is valid and if it would, they would hand over the data. that's how it should happen and how it actually happens to some extent.
    - CamperBob2 9y ago