Justices to Decide on Forcing Technology Firms to Provide Data Held Abroad

Justices to Decide on Forcing Technology Firms to Provide Data Held Abroad
In dissent, Judge José A. Cabranes wrote that the panel’s decision had restricted an investigative tool used
thousands of times a year while failing to “serve any serious, legitimate, or substantial privacy interest.”
In urging the Supreme Court to hear the case, the Justice Department said nothing should turn on Microsoft’s business decision to store data abroad
that it “can access domestically with the click of a computer mouse.” The panel’s ruling, the department’s brief said, “is causing immediate, grave, and ongoing harm to public safety, national security, and the enforcement of our laws.”
“Hundreds if not thousands of investigations of crimes — ranging from terrorism, to child pornography, to fraud
— are being or will be hampered by the government’s inability to obtain electronic evidence,” the brief said.
“Though merchants may desire lower fees, those fees are necessary to maintaining cardholder satisfaction — and if a particular merchant finds
that the cost of Amex fees outweighs the benefit it gains by accepting Amex cards, then the merchant can choose to not accept Amex cards
“And the growing privacy concerns of customers around the world mean
that granting U. S. law-enforcement agencies that broad authority would hamstring U. S. companies’ ability to compete in the multibillion-dollar cloud computing industry.”
The case is part of the broader clash between the technology industry and the federal government in the digital age.
The Second Circuit disagreed, ruling that Judge Garaufis had unduly focused on merchants’ interests “while discounting the interests of cardholders.”
“This approach does not advance overall consumer satisfaction,” Judge Richard C. Wesley wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel.