11–20 of 91 posts
One solution might be for Google to spin off its EU datacenter operations into a company incorporated outside of US jurisdiction. The Patriot Act would then no longer apply and Google would not be force to break EU law.
The first sentence of the article also mentions that Microsoft has been forced to do the same thing.
He was pitching Singapore data centres and made the joke that US could just tap into any of the data centres with a warrant just like that. Then his laugh died in dry painful way leading more or less everyone in the audience to assume that the warrants had already been issued.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"European Union legislation requires companies to protect the personal information of EU citizens" It's the law. What's more, it's a good law. I am concerned that they broke it, and seem to have tried to hide this.
The Patriot Act seems to trump EU law in many cases, as security fears oft trump privacy concerns. It's a good discussion to be had for sure, am I'm sure EU parliament members will debate it in length: They don't seem to have tried to hide anything. From another report: http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passe... The previous Microsoft admission that sparked this line of questioning: http://www.h-…
I reject the idea that a US law is more important in Europe than an European one. If that is what has happened, then it is wrong.
If nothing was hidden, why is this policy only coming to light after the fact? There seems to be some degree of not wanting people to know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"European Union legislation requires companies to protect the personal information of EU citizens" It's the law. What's more, it's a good law. I am concerned that they broke it, and seem to have tried to hide this.
The Patriot Act seems to trump EU law in many cases, as security fears oft trump privacy concerns. It's a good discussion to be had for sure, am I'm sure EU parliament members will debate it in length: They don't seem to have tried to hide anything. From another report: http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passe... The previous Microsoft admission that sparked this line of questioning: http://www.h-…
For the parts of Google in the US - yes. For the parts of Google in the EU - no.
Google had two choices:
1. Don't hand over the data => they break the US law
2. Hand over the data => they break EU law plus hand over personal data of users who might not want that
The solution is to have completely separate entities of the company in the local jurisdictions. Those follow local law and only share data with their foreign sister companies in a lawful manner and otherwise can ignore foreign law. Of course this creates some complexities but it's the right way to do, everything else gets you into trouble and even huge companies as Google can't get around colliding laws from different jurisdictions.
Handing over data to intelligence agencies is just one example of mutually exclusive laws. There are actually many more like data retention laws. The internet is probably the biggest challenge to international laws and treaties ever.
Okay, not about this issue exactly, but the amount of data that Google collects on individuals is Law Enforcement's dream.
One solution might be for Google to spin off its EU datacenter operations into a company incorporated outside of US jurisdiction. The Patriot Act would then no longer apply and Google would not be force to break EU law.
While it would be technically possible, I think Google are probably happier just not dealing with the more paranoid businesses that are worried about this. That's the impression I got when discussing similar issues with their sales staff.