US Judge orders Microsoft to hand over data stored in Ireland

[gmw]

If it's just a matter of control, then shouldn't this ruling apply to more than just data? If you have a server located in another country, can they demand it brought back? If you have money in a Swiss bank account, can they demand you bring it back? If you own a house in another country (you control it) can they demand that you let them search it?

[cromag]

Well, I'm not entirely comfortable with this ruling, but I'm not panic stricken, either. I expect it to be refined, which is the nature of the legal system here.

But, I do think that it's necessary to draw a distinction between intellectual property and physical property. I can (in theory, assuming I had the resources!) put money* in a Swiss bank account. I don't think the US government can demand that the money be brought back (although many countries do have much more stringent currency controls), but the government has a legitimate interest in that money (for taxation, to control "money laundering," etc.) and can demand full and accurate information on that money.


* It's also worth noting that I would almost certainly not actually send a bundle of dollars to the Swiss bank, or even a paper check. These days it's all electronic.

[MikeB1972]

Seems fair to me. The US court system is telling a US company to provide data that the US company owns.
Microsoft is trying not to provide the data because it's stored elsewhere (And I'd lay pretty good odds that if the US court got an Irish search warrant the data would suddenly be in Switzerland).

If the UK HMRC asks me for information on where any money paid to me comes from they aren't going to give a damn if I'm banking in France.

[darryl]

Some interesting reading:

http://www.abiworld.org/committees/n...Dangerous.html

[bevdeforges]

It's not terribly surprising, however. The US claims to maintain control over its citizens no matter where in the world they may reside - for taxes, for export controls, for travel, etc.

Lately, the Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are "people" and entitled to the same rights and protections (i.e. to be able to donate huge sums to political campaigns). I'm just waiting for someone to realize that us "real people" wind up having to pay US taxes even if we live overseas and that trying to give up our US citizenship is an expensive process, full of hassle. (Which would resolve quite of bit of this nonsense about US companies buying up foreign companies and then re-establishing themselves overseas.)

Not trying to go political on this, but honestly it's not all that surprising given the controls the US tries to maintain on those of us who live overseas.

[darryl]

Not at all surprising. All Countries do it.

[aardbewoner]

Propaganda , the can get that data from the NSA for free.

[tubemonkey]

Microsoft Defies Judge, Refuses To Hand Over Customer Emails

Microsoft looks set to be found in contempt of court after defying an order from a US judge that it should hand over data stored in Ireland.

Judge Loretta Preska, chief of the US District Court in Manhattan, has lifted a stay on her previous order that Microsoft must give email messages held in an Irish data center to US prosecutors investigating a criminal case.

However, Microsoft is refusing to comply. While the judge has concluded that the order itself isn’t appealable, a refusal to play ball by Microsoft could force her to find the company in contempt. Microsoft could then appeal against that finding to continue arguing its case.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by sgdsbfd

I'm quite surprised that none of the US members have commented . [Quoted hidden spam link deleted.]

Several of us did. I totally oppose the ruling. It violates Irish sovereignty. If the US wants these records, then they should petition the Irish courts for it.

[taustin]

This isn't as simple a case a many would believe. The court order is not against the data in Ireland, it's against the company in the US. It is not the same as ordering Microsoft to turn over data in a safe deposit box in Ireland, because the data, in this case, can be accessed without going to Ireland. The issues in this are purely political, with both sides working towards something that is not really to the benefit of the average person. One side wants the US to govern the entire world, the other side wants to make international corporations sovereign in their own right. There are no good guys, there are no bad guys, there's only greed and corruption on all sides.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by taustin

It is not the same as ordering Microsoft to turn over data in a safe deposit box in Ireland, because the data, in this case, can be accessed without going to Ireland.

I have a major issue with this. To me, location of the data is the determining factor, not accessibility. Ruling against Microsoft could open a Pandora's Box we wouldn't want opened. If we take physical presence out of the equation, it won't be long before we see any company doing business within another country subject to laws that would require it to turn over data no matter where it's stored.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I have a major issue with this. To me, location of the data is the determining factor, not accessibility. Ruling against Microsoft could open a Pandora's Box we wouldn't want opened.

Indeed. But ruling for Microsoft could do the same.

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

If we take physical presence out of the equation, it won't be long before we see any company doing business within another country subject to laws that would require it to turn over data no matter where it's stored.

As opposed to corporations being explicitly allowed to ignore the laws of countries they are doing business in, by simply moving their data around. Perhaps Microsoft should buy Sealand. Then, to subpoena anything at all, for any reason, from Microsoft, you would have to apply for a court order from . . . Micorsoft, a law unto themselves.

And, again, the legal reasoning here is that the order isn't against the data in another country, it's against an employee <b>who clearly is subject to the authority of the court</b> issuing the order.

There's serious hazards either way, and no simple solutions.

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by taustin

[...]
And, again, the legal reasoning here is that the order isn't against the data in another country, it's against an employee <b>who clearly is subject to the authority of the court</b> issuing the order.

There's serious hazards either way, and no simple solutions.

And that Microsoft employee may have to avoid visiting the Irish Republic ever again if what he was ordered to do violates Irish law.

[Rbneader]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Seems fair to me. The US court system is telling a US company to provide data that the US company owns.
Microsoft is trying not to provide the data because it's stored elsewhere (And I'd lay pretty good odds that if the US court got an Irish search warrant the data would suddenly be in Switzerland).

If the UK HMRC asks me for information on where any money paid to me comes from they aren't going to give a damn if I'm banking in France.

The conflict is at least partially because EU and US data privacy laws are different. Microsoft is caught in the middle. They can't give up the data without a fight or they could lose the ability to do some kinds of business in the EU, plus the publicity hit would be huge. MS' point here is that they need a ruling on what precisely is legal because this involves international law in an area that is a huge mess of conflicting statutes.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

If we take physical presence out of the equation, it won't be long before we see any company doing business within another country subject to laws that would require it to turn over data no matter where it's stored.

Sounds reasonable to me. Either obey the laws of the country you are in or don't do business there. Don't tell me you can brazenly violate the law of the land becaus you also do business in another country with different laws. While operating in one country you must obey the law in that country. You can access that data from the US and you use that data within the US, and in order to do so you must agree that that data falls under US law.

If it conflicts with other laws in other countries, too bad. You shouldn't get yourself into holes like that, it isn't any country's fault.

No I am not saying the US can demand Irish data used in Ireland for Irish citizens. That has never been to the US and does not fall under US jurisdiction.