Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Censorship United States Your Rights Online

Foreign Data Unsafe From US Patriot Act, Says American Law Firm 328

natecochrane writes "A prestigious law firm warns non-U.S. businesses their data is unsafe from costly and invasive raids by American law enforcement even if they host their data in their own countries. The wide interpretation of the USA Patriot Act ensures U.S. cops can legally demand data from almost anyone, anywhere for any reason and countries and their citizens are largely powerless to resist. The advice has resonance with the arrest this week of Kim 'Dotcom' on alleged copyright violations in the U.S."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Foreign Data Unsafe From US Patriot Act, Says American Law Firm

Comments Filter:
  • Legality? (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @09:09AM (#38827429)

    I wonder how a country can have such power over pretty much every other country in the world. Anyone care to explain?

  • Re:legally demand (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @09:30AM (#38827599)

    So far, it has been the policy of at least European Union, to turn around, unbuckle, and bend over.

    You want the lunch choices of our citizens flying towards your country, 3 days in advance? No problem! We'll even pick up the tab. To demand the same from them? Unreasonable

  • Re:legally demand (Score:5, Interesting)

    by snowgirl ( 978879 ) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @09:41AM (#38827695) Journal

    That means no American companies, no outsourcing to the U.S., and no data storage in the United States. The U.S. are international lepers in the privacy world and should be avoided at all costs.

    Unfortunately, even this is not enough. The non-US company would have to ensure any and all contact with the US is prevented, to ensure that there is not even a crack of a sliver of the door to US jurisdiction.

    The way they got a porno director here in the US who operated in California, was to order his product in Georgia and have them ship it there. BAM! Georgia claims jurisdiction and the guy goes to jail.

    In fact, one of the wedges used to argue for jurisdiction over megauploads, was that they used PayPal. So, now you can't deal with USD, nor can you particularly even do business with American companies. That cuts out a lot of business, and every multinational company.

    The world is getting so small now, that it will be impossible for any company or business person to ever manage to keep out from the from the ever expanding abuse of jurisdiction that the US is applying.

  • Re:legally demand (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nadaka ( 224565 ) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @10:34AM (#38828253)

    How can you be against liberalism but want liberty? The two are fundamentally and irrevocably intertwined by definition.

    You have no idea what liberal and progressive mean, at all. It has absolutely nothing to do with the size of government, only its quality. Right now we have a large, corrupt, and malignant government. We can improve it by excising the fascist and conservative aspects and have a smaller more liberal government. Or we can try to add to it laws that protect and empower the citizens and have a larger more liberal government.

    A liberal values liberty, that is it.
    A progressive seeks progress, the advancement of liberty, a more perfect nation that protects and empowers its citizens liberty.

    Law is not the loss of liberty. Murder being illegal removes your license to kill indiscriminately, but it also grants you the freedom to know that you it is very unlikely that someone will kill you.

    Libertarians and liberals are very similar. The difference is that libertarians do not believe that freedom and liberty can be increased by regulation and would prefer to live lawlessly where they would be free to exercise personal liberty at the expense of others. They would rather have license to pour poison into the drinking water and kill thousands of people than be encumbered by a little environmental, health or safety regulation.

  • Re:legally demand (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @12:10PM (#38829431) Homepage

    There is a perfectly legal way to do that. The UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague writes a formal statement of repudiation and submits it to the US and the UN. After six months the treaty is nullified.

    Countries aren't bound by treaties until the sun explodes.

  • Re:legally demand (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ihmhi ( 1206036 ) <> on Thursday January 26, 2012 @06:34PM (#38834303)

    communism does not provide sufficient incentive to the individual to contribute to the public good.

    Star Trek is the endgame of a socialist/communist utopia.

    When you never have to worry about food, housing, medical care, education, and entertainment, then the only things you have to do are either sit on your ass, explore the human condition (through philosophy, art, etc.), or contribute to the human race as a whole.

    The thing a lot of people don't get is that in such a perfect society, you don't need an incentive. There's no need for currency or anything of the like because you are taken care of. Therefore there is no need to work (how many of us would quit our jobs if we hit the lotto?). Since you don't have to work, you would probably pursue something.

Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later. -- F. Brooks, "The Mythical Man-Month"