>In cases like this, there is a difference: that data can be accessed from US soil, even while it is stored on foreign turf. Guns sitting in a warehouse cannot

>In cases like this, there is a difference: that data can be accessed from US soil, even while it is stored on foreign turf. Guns sitting in a warehouse cannot be used in the commission of a crime in the US; data on an email server in Brazil can be. A distinction without a difference. If the argument is that the data can, at some unspecified future time, be brought to the US, you get to wait for that to happen to intercept it. Just like you would with cargo in a foreign port that you suspect is going to be shipped to the US. But suppose you've already lost that argument in court in the US how does the head of Microsoft Brazil respond to the request? Microsoft seems to be screwed either way.