3 ms·

I'd appreciate a legal perspective on this - is the problem that Microsoft's EU operations are run by a corporate division rather than a standalone subsidiary?

I'd appreciate a legal perspective on this - is the problem that Microsoft's EU operations are run by a corporate division rather than a standalone subsidiary? If it were an EU-based subsidiary that controlled the data about EU citizens, it would not be beholden to US executive orders, while still otherwise offering MS the ability to control global corporate strategy from its US HQ, right? EDIT: fixed s/division/subsidiary/ in the second paragraph

saubeidl 1y ago
As long as there's any US entity at any point in the chain, I don't think it's reliable. All this talk of divisions is marketing window dressing as far as I can tell. If decisions are made from the US, it will be used as a weapon against our sovereignty.
- vbezhenar 1y ago
  Linux kernel is developed in the US. Russia felt it hard way, when their developers were cut from submitting patches. One Trump word and Europe developers will follow. That's just an example. US is a locomotive for the whole computing. I want to underline that IT production chain is incredibly long and excluding US from this chain is impossible, simple as that.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    The kernel is open source. Very worst case, we'll maintain our own fork.
- pembrook 1y ago
  Except the US doesn't really care about Europe that much. Having a government bureaucracy try to rebuild the entire US cloud software ecosystem because of one four year presidential term (which is already dramatically losing popularity in the US) sounds wildly silly to me. Meanwhile turning away from the US means running into the arms of the Chinese for most things. And they are the much bigger threat to the EU economy given their superior manufacturing abilities -- which still today is the base of the EU's prosperity. Once European industrial companies start losing to the Chinese, it's over for Europe's entire way of life and the social benefits systems all collapse. I'm sure they'll try USSR-style blanket protectionism before this happens, but will just lead to falling even further behind.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    I don't suggest fully turning away from the US. I think a stance similar to Yugoslavia in the Cold War would be the way to go. Extract concessions from both blocks by threatening to tip the balance of power in favor of their adversary.
mytailorisrich 1y ago
I believe that sanctions laws are usually drafted to include the head company and its subsidiaries, and possibly even companies in which it has a shareholding (otherwise it is too easy to work around the sanctions).
Quarrel 1y ago
Yes, if you are on the board of a company, with wholly-owned subsidiaries in many jurisdictions around the world, even where the local operations are theoretically through local corps with independent management, you absolutely still need to use your control of those subs to take effect of these types of extra-territorial laws (I can't speak specifically to US executive orders though). In the anti-money-laundering world for instance, this is very real. When a person gets sanctioned in parent company, you need to action it all the way down your subsidiaries. If that action is at the root of the company, then all subs get caught. The AML world is even weirder because of the overlapping jurisdictions of you and your banking/money-transmission partners (even if you, yourself, are a bank).

saubeidl 1y ago

As long as there's any US entity at any point in the chain, I don't think it's reliable. All this talk of divisions is marketing window dressing as far as I can tell. If decisions are made from the US, it will be used as a weapon against our sovereignty.

vbezhenar 1y ago
Linux kernel is developed in the US. Russia felt it hard way, when their developers were cut from submitting patches. One Trump word and Europe developers will follow. That's just an example. US is a locomotive for the whole computing. I want to underline that IT production chain is incredibly long and excluding US from this chain is impossible, simple as that.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  The kernel is open source. Very worst case, we'll maintain our own fork.
pembrook 1y ago
Except the US doesn't really care about Europe that much. Having a government bureaucracy try to rebuild the entire US cloud software ecosystem because of one four year presidential term (which is already dramatically losing popularity in the US) sounds wildly silly to me. Meanwhile turning away from the US means running into the arms of the Chinese for most things. And they are the much bigger threat to the EU economy given their superior manufacturing abilities -- which still today is the base of the EU's prosperity. Once European industrial companies start losing to the Chinese, it's over for Europe's entire way of life and the social benefits systems all collapse. I'm sure they'll try USSR-style blanket protectionism before this happens, but will just lead to falling even further behind.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  I don't suggest fully turning away from the US. I think a stance similar to Yugoslavia in the Cold War would be the way to go. Extract concessions from both blocks by threatening to tip the balance of power in favor of their adversary.

mytailorisrich 1y ago

I believe that sanctions laws are usually drafted to include the head company and its subsidiaries, and possibly even companies in which it has a shareholding (otherwise it is too easy to work around the sanctions).

Quarrel 1y ago

Yes, if you are on the board of a company, with wholly-owned subsidiaries in many jurisdictions around the world, even where the local operations are theoretically through local corps with independent management, you absolutely still need to use your control of those subs to take effect of these types of extra-territorial laws (I can't speak specifically to US executive orders though). In the anti-money-laundering world for instance, this is very real. When a person gets sanctioned in parent company, you need to action it all the way down your subsidiaries. If that action is at the root of the company, then all subs get caught. The AML world is even weirder because of the overlapping jurisdictions of you and your banking/money-transmission partners (even if you, yourself, are a bank).