281–290 of 629 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to me that they did comply with Brazilian law. They handed over all the conversations they had — zero. Is there a law that says they have to record all the conversations?
They didn’t – they didn’t hand over the IP addresses that were requested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are missing the most important part of the story. Facebook and Whatsapp are not ignoring the request. They have said that it is impossible for them to provide the information requested.
That's the problem with all these judicial orders. They think it's a flip of the switch to comply. Why don't the courts provide the money to build the services and infrastructure to comply with the order?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if a judge demanded a telco hand over an audio recording of any specific conversation, they must comply -- even though calls are not recorded and stored? If a judge demanded the postal service hand over an image of every envelope processed, it must comply -- even though no such images exist? Where does it end?
Look, if a judge has such a right, a corporate lawyer usually has an idea that such a request might come. Companies that do not break law must do what is needed to make sure they will not violate any laws – neither now nor in the future. Or WhatsApp may say – sorry Brazil, we do not think that complying with your laws would be appropriate for us and stop servicing Brazilian numbers until laws are changed. But it's ju…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if a judge demanded a telco hand over an audio recording of any specific conversation, they must comply -- even though calls are not recorded and stored? If a judge demanded the postal service hand over an image of every envelope processed, it must comply -- even though no such images exist? Where does it end?
That's why Google doesn't operates in China at full scale. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_China They decided that was agains the company values to comply with Chinese law, so they stopped offering some services. It's the law, and maybe I don't like it at all, but still I thing that companies should comply. I also thing that that laws should me changed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>At which point you agree to adhere to their laws and regulations. Uhm nope. If my app(published on Apple Store/Google Play) violated a law in Saudi Arabia and they sent me a letter requesting me to appear and subject myself to 100 lashes for violating their law, I would very promptly disregard said letter, to put it politely.
Then don’t publish your app in those countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if a judge demanded a telco hand over an audio recording of any specific conversation, they must comply -- even though calls are not recorded and stored? If a judge demanded the postal service hand over an image of every envelope processed, it must comply -- even though no such images exist? Where does it end?
That's why Google doesn't operates in China at full scale. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_China They decided that was agains the company values to comply with Chinese law, so they stopped offering some services. It's the law, and maybe I don't like it at all, but still I thing that companies should comply. I also thing that that laws should me changed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
there is no coup in place in brazil, stop spreading fud
The only people that say there is no coup going on are people supporting the coup. Please get informed about this discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies can be punished for failure to obey laws. If a company didn't bother to retain records on who bought something they are now required to recall due to safety failures I can't imagine any country would say that is ok. They would be punished. I don't happen to think the law mentioned is a good one. And I have no idea how the law is actually worded. Depending on how it is worded maybe it is ok to just not keep…
So if a judge demanded a telco hand over an audio recording of any specific conversation, they must comply -- even though calls are not recorded and stored? If a judge demanded the postal service hand over an image of every envelope processed, it must comply -- even though no such images exist? Where does it end?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get a grip on reality and attain an understanding of how these communication systems work, then move on to other avenues of investigation
doesn't law there mandate retaining of all communications for service providers? if that's the case, as hinted by other people, and whatsapp has been found in violation of that requirement, then blocking it seems the correct course of action (given the judge cannot change nor ignore the law) the big IF is what the Brazilian communication law mandates to companies providing a service on their territory.
From what I can tell (I can read Portuguese, but I'm not versed in Brazilian law), that's only for ISPs.