Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I can't believe we're afraid of these assholes (Score 1) 309

by schnell (#47798119) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

It's like they WANT to remain in the 8th Century. Why is it exactly that we're afraid of them?

Because while they're eager to keep an 8th century moral code (and dress code for women), they seem decidedly more modern in their choice of military forces and interest (but not yet attainment of) nuclear weapons.

Because, you know, when you're the Grand Ayatollah, some "Bikinis" are OK but definitely not others.

Comment: Re:Revolving door (Score 1) 117

by schnell (#47797345) Attached to: Google's Megan Smith Would Be First US CTO Worthy of the Title

Academia is part of the real world, easily as much as industry is.

HA HA HA hee hee hee ha. Wait, you were serious?

Academia, technically, is part of the "real world." It's just the part with 180 degree different rules and priorities than the "industry" part that employs most Americans is. I have plenty of friends in academia and I love them to death but when we compare "what's happening at work" I will talk about the life or death of some multi-million dollar project that's keeping me up at night, and they will reveal their big pain point at work is that some guy caused an uproar at a conference because he give a citation in a paper to an ally and finessed his work around giving a citation to someone who he got in a snit with several years ago about different interpretations of a theory.

Now, that doesn't make one job better than the other but they sure are different. As they say, same planet, different worlds. Or, as the great academic Dr. Ray Stantz once told a colleague, "Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities, we didn't have to produce anything. You've never been out of college! You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private sector. They expect results."

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47795287) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

Microsoft Ireland would be constrained by european law from exporting the data. Is that not the case?

No. If that were the case, they would have said so. Instead they said, that it is Microsoft USAs data and the request needs to go through them. If it were European law that came into play, the US would already have the data as it is needed for a criminal investigation.

Effectivally, one Microsoft entity is arguing it is US property and the other is arguing it is Irish property. Neither wants to give the data up because it will have negative connotations to their subscribers. So, they are playing games.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by jonbryce (#47795111) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

The directors of Microsoft Operations Ireland Ltd are obliged to follow Irish law, not US law. The US parent company could vote them out of office at the next AGM of the Irish company, but if they were sacked for refusing to comply with Irish law, they would have a claim against the company for wrongful dismissal.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47794967) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

Actually, this same scenario happened with the banking industry and what the judge is proposing actually follows the international law and treaties that came out of it. In short, it doesn't matter where the assets are stored as to who has jurisdiction, but as to who has control over them

So there is a treaty convering funds in accounts held by international banks. Tell us why a company should be obligated by a treaty that doesn't apply to the industry in which it operates?

Because in modern banking, actual paper money isn't shipped back and forth, it is wired electronically and the treaty includes the records of transactions. Effectively, like the emails the warrant is wanting to get at.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47794957) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

Some of us do understand it. Others define it as a copyable bunch of electrons because that allows them to steal movies and TV shows and games without listening to their conscience.

Others, like myself, understand digital is still property, but do it anyway because our own countries don't show these things on anything like an acceptable schedule. And we partly mollify our consciences by buying the DVDs later.

It has nothing to do with stealing. It does have to do with taxation. Intellectual property isn't taxable like personal tangible property and real property is.One can sell the right to use intellectual property, but one cannot sell the intellectual property itself.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47794941) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

Also, this is not tangible personal property. It is a bunch of electrons.

Are you serious? Are you that much of an idiot?

There is a reason there is *intellectual* property law.

Property laws exist immaterial of what form the property takes -- trademarks and patents are all nothing more than ideas in our heads put to paper, and they are protected for a reason.

I can see this reasoning on another site, but I'd think the readers of Slashdot would have an understanding of what digital property entails.

The reason there is intellectual property law is precisely because the things covered under it are not tangilbe personal property.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47794929) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

If you think possession of child pornography is legal in Ireland then I've got a bridge for you to buy. I'll make you buy it twice for bringing in a "think of the children" flawed argument in a ridiculous attempt to bolster your position.

You miss the point. What people are arguing for in their support of Microsoft is that content related to US criminal activiity would be off limits if the US company stored the content on an overseas server. Whether that content is about a mob hit, ponzi scheme, terrorist attack, and yes, even child porn, it would be off limits.

The simple point to remember in this case is that an individual is suspected of criminal activity in the US and it is believed his emails have evidence of such activity. Microsoft is refusing to turn those over, even though there is a court order to do so, on the grounds that the US lacks jurisdiction because Microsoft happened to store said emails in Ireland.

Comment: Re:More accuratly "self preservation" (Score 1) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47793655) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

No, it won't. Europeans will still have the same protections they do under their laws. However, US citizens committing a crime in the US won't be able to store their data on foreign servers of American companies and have it safe from authorities. In otherwords, if a US crime is committed, it doesn't matter where the US company hosts its server farm, it is still under the control of that company and subject to the authorities.

You are incorrect. the case would impact Europian Microsoft customers as well. Indeed, the account in question is almost certainly held by a non-American.

Only if those European Microsoft customers broke a US law and used Microsoft to house the data about such criminal activity on their servers. The US still needed a warrant in this case to obtain the data in question. It would take a US court to tell Microsoft to turn over data on a foreign citizen and there would have to be cause to do that. So, it is likely that the only European Microsoft customers that would be effected are those that happen to break US laws.

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 4, Insightful) 374

by Dcnjoe60 (#47793639) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government

But if an American visits a foreign country, they and their property are subject to the laws of that county. We expect the same of foreign visitors entering our country. And if that foreign countries data protection laws differ from those of the USA, they should still be honored.

Having some foreign government insist on the right to root around in their citizens possesions while in this country, either as a tourist or a refugee would open up a human rights as well as an intellectual property can of worms. Imagine an H-1B worker's home country insisting on receiving copies of all of their work product while employed here.

But the criminal in question didn't visit Ireland and leave his data there. Microsoft didn't visit Ireland, either, but it did send the data there. Also, this is not tangible personal property. It is a bunch of electrons.

As for the H-1B worker, that is a strawman argument and has nothing to do with this. Here is a concrete example of what is going on here. I steal a painting in the US and send it via FedEx to Amerstam where it sits in FedEx's hangar waiting to be picked up. The feds arrest me and ask FedEx to send the painting back for evidence. Should FedEx say no, because it is now in their possession in a foreign country? Before you answer, the courts have already answered it and said yes, FedEx would need to return it as long as it is still in their possession.

Or, lets say two child pornographers both store the pictures they have taken in the US (so US law is broken) on Google's servers and one of the pornographers pictures happen to reside on a server under Google's control in Ireland and the other on a server under Google's control in the US. Is guy who had the luck of his data being routed to Ireland off scott free while the other guy goes to jail, when both of these accounts and servers are under Google's control? While the courts haven't answered this question, they have done so with banking and found that US banks must still turn over seized assets of US bank holders even if those assets are now held in foreign countries. Most other countries also have the same laws, too.

So, the question really is whether or not a criminal should be able to use a US company to hide it's data just because the US company has a server farm somewhere other than the US?

We can predict everything, except the future.

Working...