Topic: Obama administration says the world’s servers are ours (Read 1128 times)

He should be imprisoned to set the precedent and to send a message to the puppet masters and the next puppet they pay to put in office.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7Yu_jjfu3k

Democratic cat

Obama needs to be imprisoned for life for his crimes against humanity.

Not from private companies though. Civil servants getting their salary taxing those private businesses cannot afford to be bothered by any smidgen of corruption. Emails getting deleted is a feature for them, a robust feature...

Hasn't the US DOJ heard that email is highly unstable and that hard drives are often prone to destroying information right when a subpoena is being served?

Microsoft ordered to give US customer e-mails stored abroad
Decision affirms US position that the world's servers are for the taking.


A federal judge ruled Thursday that Microsoft must hand over e-mails stored on an overseas server to US authorities. The case gives the Obama administration approval to reach into servers abroad.
"It is a question of control, not a question of the location of that information," US District Judge Loretta Preska ruled in a closely followed legal flap. The bench order from the New York judge was stayed pending appeal.

The judge sided with the Obama Administration claims that any company with operations in the United States must comply with valid warrants for data, even if the content is stored overseas—in this case Dublin, Ireland. It's a position Microsoft and companies like Apple contended was wrong, arguing that the enforcement of US law stops at the border.

A magistrate judge had already sided with the government's position, ruling in April that "the basic principle that an entity lawfully obligated to produce information must do so regardless of the location of that information." Microsoft appealed to a federal judge, and Preska ruled from the bench after a two-hour hearing Thursday.

Microsoft said in court filings that "Congress has not authorized the issuance of warrants that reach outside US territory. The government cannot seek and a court cannot issue a warrant allowing federal agents to break down the doors of Microsoft’s Dublin facility."

The Redmond, Washington-based company said its consumer trust is low in the wake of the Edward Snowden revelations. Microsoft told Judge Preska in a filing that the "government's position in this case further erodes that trust and will ultimately erode the leadership of US technologies in the global market."

Companies like Apple, AT&T, Cisco, and Verizon agree. Verizon said (PDF) that a decision favoring the US would produce "dramatic conflict with foreign data protection laws." Apple and Cisco said (PDF) that the tech sector is put "at risk" of being sanctioned by foreign governments and that the US should seek cooperation with foreign nations via treaties, a position the US said is not practical.

The Justice Department said global jurisdiction is necessary in an age when "electronic communications are used extensively by criminals of all types in the United States and abroad, from fraudsters to hackers to drug dealers, in furtherance of violations of US law."

The e-mail the US authorities are seeking from Microsoft concerns a drug-trafficking investigation. Microsoft often stores e-mail on servers closest to the account holder.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/microsoft-ordered-to-give-us-customer-e-mails-stored-abroad/

It seems the government is set on making more and more regulations making it impossible to conduct business with out their say so.  They have to keep their hands in your pocket to remain relevant.

If a company were to have any present in the US then in theory the US could try to compel the company to hand over overseas data. They would still not have any legal leg to stand on as US laws only apply in the US.

The courts are still at a very early stage at this point - only at the magistrate level, which is really not even a real judge so the case has a long way to go before it will set any kind of precedent.

What is to stop these corporations simply moving their Headquarters out of the US and thus sidestepping this issue.

If the argument is that the corporations are US based, so then US law applies unilaterally to other countries they don't have an argument if those corporations move to a more business friendly country and say the damn same thing back to the US government - EVEN for US based servers!

This is insane! If this passes, this could potentially lead companies to avoid or move out of the United States. In turn this would open another can or worms. If a simple service like email for example is run and maintained by a company and Canada for example but people in the US use it, will that mean that their servers are open to this type of scrutiny. Not to mention, taking jobs away from people.

Maybe our "democratic" overseers should spend more time correcting the economy, unemployment, or international relations instead of spying on it's own people.

And this is why I want to stick with cryptocurrencies and get all other online companies to stay out of the U.S if at all possible, I think all purely online companies should commit to an international boycott of the U.S Dollar and the government itself.

MSFT "Oh those emails, well you see, the thing is we only keep backups for 6 months and the hard drive storing those emails crashed a couple of months ago.  We meant to tell you but couldn't find the proper announcement form 187-ICALLBS325i".  In keeping with your call for green technology we recycled the drive already.

Have a BLESSED day."

This it will likely end up with isolating the U.S. economically in certain sectors. Simply put, the laws in certain countries will make it impossible to use certain services offered by American businesses. That is true whether the servers are hosted on American or foreign soil. Likewise, the laws in certain countries will make it impossible for certain foreign businesses to operate in the U.S. since it would end up compromising their operations outside of the U.S..

Now I'm not suggesting that the U.S. shouldn't stop enforcing the law as soon as data is hosted on foreign soil. I am saying that it is a very complicated matter as far as businesses that have operations inside of the U.S. are concerned. As such the U.S. should be looking at other avenues to collect evidence.

The "Bush/Obama" Adm. has been going more and more aggressive with their desire to control whatever they wish to & the "fuck it" attitude its had to foreign/international laws, especially from what the Snowden docs & torture memos have shown. It has become apparent that the gov't is now "above the law" and do as it wishes. Shame there isn't a retired cop who was brutally scared by a shot to the face, and had to have a new face created, who goes after those who operate "above the law" to bring them to justice.....and has one badass high-tech car to aide him on his lone ranger-style quest.......

All of your email are belong to us!

maybe Barry should worry more about "finding" Lerner's emails before he demands a foreign, sovereign nation hand over theirs.

Microsoft knew pissing off their customers mean they will lose them to google and facebook.

I find it impressive Microsoft is for once spearheading a campaign like this. It is usually Google or Facebook or even Twitter being in the line of fire. Good to know Microsoft is not a lapdog yet, and can still bite when things get a bit too absurd.

US says global reach needed to gut "fraudsters," "hackers," and "drug dealers."


Global governments, the tech sector, and scholars are closely following a legal flap in which the US Justice Department claims that Microsoft must hand over e-mail stored in Dublin, Ireland.

In essence, President Barack Obama's administration claims that any company with operations in the United States must comply with valid warrants for data, even if the content is stored overseas. It's a position Microsoft and companies like Apple say is wrong, arguing that the enforcement of US law stops at the border.

A magistrate judge has already sided with the government's position, ruling in April that "the basic principle that an entity lawfully obligated to produce information must do so regardless of the location of that information." Microsoft appealed to a federal judge, and the case is set to be heard on July 31.

In its briefs filed last week, the US government said that content stored online doesn't enjoy the same type of Fourth Amendment protections as data stored in the physical world. The government cited (PDF) the Stored Communications Act (SCA), a President Ronald Reagan-era regulation:



Overseas records must be disclosed domestically when a valid subpoena, order, or warrant compels their production. The disclosure of records under such circumstances has never been considered tantamount to a physical search under Fourth Amendment principles, and Microsoft is mistaken to argue that the SCA provides for an overseas search here. As there is no overseas search or seizure, Microsoft’s reliance on principles of extra-territoriality and comity falls wide of the mark.



Microsoft said the decision has wide-ranging, global implications. "Congress has not authorized the issuance of warrants that reach outside US territory,” Microsoft’s attorneys wrote. “The government cannot seek and a court cannot issue a warrant allowing federal agents to break down the doors of Microsoft’s Dublin facility."

The Redmond, Washington-based company said its consumer trust is low in the wake of the Edward Snowden revelations. It told the US judge presiding over the case that "[t]he government's position in this case further erodes that trust and will ultimately erode the leadership of US technologies in the global market."

Companies like Apple, AT&T, Cisco, and Verizon agree. Verizon said (PDF) that a decision favoring the US would produce "dramatic conflict with foreign data protection laws." Apple and Cisco said (PDF) that the tech sector is put "at risk" of being sanctioned by foreign governments and that the US should seek cooperation with foreign nations via treaties, a position the US said is not practical.

The Justice Department said global jurisdiction is necessary in an age when "electronic communications are used extensively by criminals of all types in the United States and abroad, from fraudsters to hackers to drug dealers, in furtherance of violations of US law."

The e-mail the US authorities are seeking from Microsoft concerns a drug-trafficking investigation. Microsoft often stores e-mail on servers closest to the account holder.

The senior counsel for the Irish Supreme Court wrote in a recent filing that a US-Ireland "Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty" was the "efficient" avenue (PDF) for the US government to obtain the e-mail held on Microsoft's external servers.

Orin Kerr, a Fourth Amendment expert at George Washington University, said, "The scope of the privacy laws around the world is now a very important question, and this is the beginning of what may be a lot of litigation on the question. So it's a big case to watch."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/obama-administration-says-the-worlds-servers-are-ours/