Microsoft Deems Privacy A Fundamental Right, Asks U.S. And EU Governments To Obey It

[kogashuko]

Thats fine, data security is great but they really need to put an end to what companies like apple are doing. They make a product and once the us government gets probable cause to obtain a search warrant they serve it on apple and apple says "we will not honor this." Then the us government just says oh ok and walks away. What they need to do is help those companies maintain privacy but once a lawful warrant is issued and they decline to cooperate, go in and seize every server they have for analysis. When a company like apple has all of their devices imessages, icloud, and iwhatever unavailable to their users for months they will get more cooperative.

 

[Math Geek]

if you take your gun with you and it is illegal there, then yes you would be arrested. the lawyer is saying that any data the visitor has on his/her person would fall under the law of the country he is in and not the country he is from. this is how the rest of law works and he is stating that he wants data to follow similar logic.

One of us either misread or misunderstood the article, because I took from it the exact opposite. Microsoft wants the US government to lobby foreign governments before seizing data stored locally. Of course, Microsoft evidently believes that privacy is a fundamental right that should only be enjoyed by citizens of the EU. If you have offices in Mumbai, Karachi, or Dubai then you're probably some terror organization and Microsoft will continue assisting the US government in spying on you in every way they can. At least until your native governments threaten costly import bans on Microsoft software.

re-reading the article shows that we are both almost right, but in different ways. i was thinking of the 3rd point when i posted which states "Therefore, if an EU citizen travels to the U.S., Microsoft's legal officer believes that the U.S. law should apply when dealing with his data." however i do see where this seems to also be implying data of the eu citizen that might be in the eu at the time as well should still fall under us law despite being out of us territory. so i do see your point.

but the first point is pretty clear as well about your point "if the data is stored on U.S. servers but belongs to an EU national, then the U.S. government should only be able to get access to that data in a manner that conforms to EU laws" this does clearly say that no matter where the data is, the laws of the home country should apply.

either way, the gun analogy does not work at all. all of this seems to be speaking of cloud data and not data on a person which i'm pretty sure local law takes precedent over no matter what. i don't see how a "cloud" gun even remotely fits into the argument MS is making. i know in the US, the "OMG THERE TRYING TO TAKE OUR GUNS!!!!" argument is the ultimate distraction from whatever discussion is being had but not even through a huge stretch of the imagination does it work here.

 

[Math Geek]

Thats fine, data security is great but they really need to put an end to what companies like apple are doing. They make a product and once the us government gets probable cause to obtain a search warrant they serve it on apple and apple says "we will not honor this." Then the us government just says oh ok and walks away. What they need to do is help those companies maintain privacy but once a lawful warrant is issued and they decline to cooperate, go in and seize every server they have for analysis. When a company like apple has all of their devices imessages, icloud, and iwhatever unavailable to their users for months they will get more cooperative.

that's not entirely fair the majority of what apple has been asked for is a way into the data on an iphone which is impossible due to the encryption of the data. not even apple can get to the data if it is password protected. so they are not really saying no but rather "we can't"

a small part is older devices (pre ios 8) that they could actually get into if they wanted to. they are actually saying no they won't give up this data, so that part is right. but the realiy is that a very small % of requests apply to this older ios and the old devices it is on. the vast majority fall under the "we can't even if we wanted to" category. i am happy about this anyway since htye seem to be the only one fighting for the little guy. true they collect a lot of data as well and i'm sure most of it will be handed over if asked but at least so long as it is only on the phone then it will stay private.

and as a side note, the supreme court has ruled that a person can not be forced to give up the pin number for the phone due to 5th amendment concerns. the pin is only in the mind and therefore a person can keep it private. the fingerprint locks though are not protected and you can be forced to unlock a phone with your fingerprint!! so screw the print recognition and stick to a pin number if you wish to keep your midget pron collection safe from the cops

 

[mavikt]

so click`ing next without reading the Agreement it`s without consent ?

That's the sad part. In this day and age you couldn't use practically any electrical device without having to "Agree". I remember when I bought my Sonos system. Halfway through the EULA I thought, "I don't agree to this, it's a freaking music system, and what you're writing shouldn't have any bearing on it". Anyways, I didn't go back to the store, I "agreed" and thought that this shouldn't practically have any implications of me using the system, but still I "agreed".

Last time I read Blizzard's WoW agreement I felt it was reasonable, and the Steam agreement was tooo darn long, another problem. But to Steam's credit, they actual had sub-clauses adhering to different countries national laws, so they had actually made an effort.
Not the standard US agreement, bend over and we'll see you in California court!

 

[Achoo22]

In this day and age you couldn't use practically any electrical device without having to "Agree".

Our foundering, effete FTC has completely failed us. Where state law (especially in CA, FL, MD, etc) previously shored up the gaping consumer protection holes the FTC left behind, it is now even weaker because luring a hot industry equates to massive political capital. The protections the EU is requesting for its citizens should be laughably basic for We the People in the US. Every citizen should reflect on that and what it means.

 

[zodiacfml]

duh?! Privacy simply means there should be no access unless its in plain text. It is futile though, private companies should be able to fight this invasion with better technologies that they themselves have almost impossible way to open user data.