Apple joins other tech giants in opposing US federal court’s Microsoft ruling
17 Jun 2014
Apple has joined other technology companies and telecommunications giants Cisco, Verizon, and AT&T, in opposing a federal court ruling over Microsoft, that could force other US companies to hand over data about foreign customers to the US government, in violation of international laws and treaties.
Cupertino-based Apple has chosen to participate with an amicus curiae brief filed jointly with networking equipment maker Cisco in US District Court for the Southern District of New York, which was first revealed by GigaOm.
Microsoft is appealing certain parts of a warrant issued by US magistrate judge James Francis IV ordering the company to grant US authorities access to email data from an Irish customer.
According to Microsoft the data is held in Ireland, and compliance with the order would force it to break Irish data protection laws.
The tech giant had earlier suggested that the government could instead rely on the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between the US and Ireland, in which both countries had agreed to assist one another on gathering and exchanging information for the purposes of law enforcement.
Apple's intervention came after judge Francis rejected the suggestion.
"In rejecting Microsoft's motion to vacate the search warrant, the Magistrate erred by failing to consider the conflicting obligations under foreign and domestic law that arise when courts order providers to produce data about foreign users stored in foreign countries," Apple and Cisco's filing reads. "By omitting this evaluation - and by dismissing the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) process out of hand with no factual findings regarding the Irish MLAT at issue - the Magistrate placed the burden of reconciling conflicting international laws squarely on U.S. providers."
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) too filed a friend-of-the-court brief Friday, saying US warrants were not applicable to emails stored on an overseas server.
"The Fourth Amendment protects from unreasonable search and seizure. You can't ignore the 'seizure' part just because the property is digital and not physical," read a statement by staff attorney Hanni Fakhoury. "Ignoring this basic point has dangerous implications -- it could open the door to unfounded law enforcement access to and collection of data stored around the world."
"The government takes the extraordinary position," the Microsoft's filing reads, "that by merely serving such a warrant on any US-based email provider, it has the right to obtain the private emails of any subscriber, no matter where in the world the data may be located, and without the knowledge or consent of the subscriber or the relevant foreign government where the data is stored."
