WEBVTT - Microsoft Prepares for Supreme Court Privacy Battle (Audio)

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:03.720
<v Speaker 1>It's a win for privacy advocates, though perhaps temporary. A

0:00:03.760 --> 0:00:06.200
<v Speaker 1>split on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has kept

0:00:06.200 --> 0:00:09.200
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft in a winning column and its ongoing case with

0:00:09.240 --> 0:00:12.480
<v Speaker 1>the US government about access to email store in Ireland.

0:00:12.880 --> 0:00:15.400
<v Speaker 1>In July, a three judge panel of the court unanimously

0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:18.759
<v Speaker 1>ruled that prosecutors could not force Microsoft to turn over

0:00:18.840 --> 0:00:22.680
<v Speaker 1>customer emails and other data stored on servers outside the US.

0:00:23.120 --> 0:00:25.560
<v Speaker 1>The government requested that the case be heard by the

0:00:25.720 --> 0:00:28.880
<v Speaker 1>entire Appeals Court, but the court split foward to four,

0:00:29.040 --> 0:00:32.360
<v Speaker 1>leaving the initial decision in place and increasing the likelihood

0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:34.880
<v Speaker 1>that the Supreme Court will take on the case. Our

0:00:34.920 --> 0:00:39.280
<v Speaker 1>guests are Matt Larson, Bloomberg intelligence analyst, and Jonathan Mannus,

0:00:39.320 --> 0:00:43.000
<v Speaker 1>professor at the University of Buffalo. Jonathan, let's start with

0:00:43.120 --> 0:00:46.720
<v Speaker 1>a brief review of what the three judge panel based

0:00:46.760 --> 0:00:50.400
<v Speaker 1>its decision on. Sure, So, so, what happened, as you

0:00:50.479 --> 0:00:52.000
<v Speaker 1>said out, what happened in this case is that the

0:00:52.080 --> 0:00:55.639
<v Speaker 1>FBI issued a warrant for emails that were located in Ireland,

0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:58.840
<v Speaker 1>and the Microsoft was storing in Ireland, and um it

0:00:58.920 --> 0:01:01.440
<v Speaker 1>was basing this on a Night six law called the

0:01:01.440 --> 0:01:04.959
<v Speaker 1>Store Communications Act. And what the What the second Circuit

0:01:05.000 --> 0:01:07.919
<v Speaker 1>basically said was that you know, that law didn't contemplate

0:01:07.959 --> 0:01:11.320
<v Speaker 1>the use of domestic warrants to obtain information that was

0:01:11.360 --> 0:01:14.399
<v Speaker 1>stored abroad. UM, and it said that it wasn't going

0:01:14.440 --> 0:01:18.160
<v Speaker 1>to interpret the law to have you know, extra territorial

0:01:18.160 --> 0:01:21.880
<v Speaker 1>effect to have effect outside of the borders unless Congress

0:01:21.880 --> 0:01:23.800
<v Speaker 1>went back and made clear that it that it meant

0:01:23.840 --> 0:01:25.960
<v Speaker 1>to do so. So it's really kicking the issue back

0:01:25.959 --> 0:01:29.160
<v Speaker 1>to Congress to try to update the law UM for

0:01:29.240 --> 0:01:33.039
<v Speaker 1>the modern age of the Internet and cloud computing. Matt,

0:01:33.160 --> 0:01:36.080
<v Speaker 1>A lot of other companies you know, are very interested

0:01:36.120 --> 0:01:39.480
<v Speaker 1>in this case. Some of them writyn Amicus briefs. Why

0:01:39.600 --> 0:01:43.920
<v Speaker 1>is this case so important to the tech industry. Yeah, this,

0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:47.360
<v Speaker 1>this case is a UM is closely watched by a

0:01:47.400 --> 0:01:50.440
<v Speaker 1>lot of companies who are investing heavily in cloud services

0:01:50.480 --> 0:01:54.320
<v Speaker 1>and the necessary infrastructure UM kind of the platform is

0:01:54.360 --> 0:01:58.240
<v Speaker 1>a service market is growing exponentially there it's anticipated to

0:01:58.280 --> 0:02:04.240
<v Speaker 1>be a twenty two billion dollar UM investment in by investment,

0:02:04.280 --> 0:02:06.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, people are going to be uh putting that

0:02:06.880 --> 0:02:10.280
<v Speaker 1>much into growing these services and so uh this is

0:02:10.360 --> 0:02:14.400
<v Speaker 1>led by companies like Microsoft, Amazon, UM and so to

0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:20.200
<v Speaker 1>ensure customers privacy to ensure UM confidence in this build out,

0:02:20.240 --> 0:02:23.040
<v Speaker 1>they really need the law to UM to kind of

0:02:23.120 --> 0:02:28.360
<v Speaker 1>line up and meet with expectations in the tech community. So, Jonathan,

0:02:28.440 --> 0:02:30.280
<v Speaker 1>is it more likely that this is going to go

0:02:30.320 --> 0:02:32.680
<v Speaker 1>to the Supreme Court that Congress is going to do

0:02:32.760 --> 0:02:35.760
<v Speaker 1>something about this? Well, it's hard. It's hard to tell.

0:02:36.200 --> 0:02:39.359
<v Speaker 1>It seems likely that the government will try to will

0:02:39.400 --> 0:02:41.440
<v Speaker 1>ask the Supreme Court to hear the case. The Supreme

0:02:41.480 --> 0:02:43.959
<v Speaker 1>Court doesn't have to, but in a case like this,

0:02:44.320 --> 0:02:48.280
<v Speaker 1>where the question is how to interpret a federal statute,

0:02:48.600 --> 0:02:51.840
<v Speaker 1>and where the government is likely to say that the

0:02:51.880 --> 0:02:55.960
<v Speaker 1>current interpretation that the Court of Appeals adopted UM can

0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:58.760
<v Speaker 1>impede its investigations, it seems that there's a pretty good

0:02:58.800 --> 0:03:01.280
<v Speaker 1>shots of the Supreme Court will it's take it UM.

0:03:01.320 --> 0:03:03.639
<v Speaker 1>If they do, that might take the pressure off Congress

0:03:03.720 --> 0:03:06.720
<v Speaker 1>to amend the law UM while they wait to see

0:03:06.760 --> 0:03:09.160
<v Speaker 1>what the Spame Court dies. Well, Matt, what would the

0:03:09.240 --> 0:03:13.480
<v Speaker 1>industry like Congress to do to this law? You know,

0:03:13.560 --> 0:03:15.880
<v Speaker 1>at at at kind of a baseline level, I think

0:03:15.919 --> 0:03:18.440
<v Speaker 1>they want clarity. You know, as as was mentioned earlier,

0:03:18.440 --> 0:03:23.800
<v Speaker 1>this law well before UM, the the boom in in

0:03:23.919 --> 0:03:26.600
<v Speaker 1>cloud will before the boom and everybody using email, and

0:03:26.680 --> 0:03:30.360
<v Speaker 1>so there are differing views on how much access the

0:03:30.400 --> 0:03:34.240
<v Speaker 1>government and third parties have to to data that's stored

0:03:34.280 --> 0:03:36.560
<v Speaker 1>in the cloud. It's it's There are some schools of

0:03:36.560 --> 0:03:38.920
<v Speaker 1>thought that think it should be treated similar to a

0:03:38.960 --> 0:03:42.280
<v Speaker 1>file cabinet. If it's stored in a different location, UM,

0:03:42.360 --> 0:03:44.520
<v Speaker 1>it should remain there unless you have the permission of

0:03:44.520 --> 0:03:47.600
<v Speaker 1>that that country or have um, you know, kind of

0:03:47.600 --> 0:03:50.080
<v Speaker 1>local jurisdiction to access files. And there's the other school

0:03:50.120 --> 0:03:52.560
<v Speaker 1>of thought that says, well, everything is accessible everywhere and

0:03:52.560 --> 0:03:55.320
<v Speaker 1>it's very easy to get everything. And so I don't

0:03:55.360 --> 0:03:58.360
<v Speaker 1>know that when you get into the nitty gritty of

0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:02.480
<v Speaker 1>of what side, um you know, what side rules or

0:04:02.520 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 1>what sides uh perception should be the rule of law,

0:04:05.520 --> 0:04:07.640
<v Speaker 1>that that there's going to be a whole lot of consensus.

0:04:07.640 --> 0:04:11.880
<v Speaker 1>But I think generally speaking, UM tech tech companies want

0:04:11.960 --> 0:04:15.760
<v Speaker 1>higher privacy protections to ensure consumer confidence in their products

0:04:15.760 --> 0:04:19.640
<v Speaker 1>and also to put um other nations where they're doing business.

0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.800
<v Speaker 1>Kind of let's them breathe a sigh of relief knowing

0:04:22.839 --> 0:04:26.760
<v Speaker 1>that their own citizens data is protected. Jonathan Microsoft is

0:04:26.839 --> 0:04:29.760
<v Speaker 1>also suing the government to stop the FBI so called

0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:33.839
<v Speaker 1>sneak and peak searches of emails that allow the federal

0:04:33.880 --> 0:04:37.839
<v Speaker 1>government to obtain cloud store data without the customer's knowledge.

0:04:37.960 --> 0:04:41.839
<v Speaker 1>Where does that stand? So that that case, UM is

0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:44.880
<v Speaker 1>in the district court in in Seattle Settle District Court,

0:04:44.920 --> 0:04:47.520
<v Speaker 1>and there was just you know, our lords with justin

0:04:47.560 --> 0:04:50.120
<v Speaker 1>court arguing in that case, and that that's a crucially

0:04:50.120 --> 0:04:53.440
<v Speaker 1>important case because what's what's at stake there is whether

0:04:53.600 --> 0:04:57.480
<v Speaker 1>users know, UM, when the government has obtained their information

0:04:57.960 --> 0:05:01.480
<v Speaker 1>UM that's stored on the cloud by Microsoft after other companies. UM.

0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:04.280
<v Speaker 1>And given that you know, we all are now you know,

0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:07.839
<v Speaker 1>storing our emails, documents, photos, all kinds of other personal

0:05:07.839 --> 0:05:11.920
<v Speaker 1>information you know on services like Microsoft Cloud and um,

0:05:12.040 --> 0:05:15.520
<v Speaker 1>Amazon and others. Uh. This this question about whether we

0:05:15.600 --> 0:05:18.359
<v Speaker 1>even get to know when the government has searched for

0:05:18.440 --> 0:05:21.680
<v Speaker 1>and obtained our information is crucially important. And so Microsoft

0:05:21.760 --> 0:05:24.559
<v Speaker 1>is in court saying that if users have a Fourth

0:05:24.560 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 1>Amendment constitutional right to know when the information has been searched,

0:05:27.800 --> 0:05:30.359
<v Speaker 1>and also that they have a First Amendment right to

0:05:30.440 --> 0:05:33.160
<v Speaker 1>be able to let their users know UM that that

0:05:33.240 --> 0:05:36.000
<v Speaker 1>they've been forced to comply with an order. Well, lots

0:05:36.040 --> 0:05:38.640
<v Speaker 1>to talk about in this case, and we will do

0:05:38.680 --> 0:05:41.280
<v Speaker 1>that at another time the standing issues involved. I want

0:05:41.279 --> 0:05:43.640
<v Speaker 1>to thank both of you. That's Jonathan Mannis, he's a

0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:47.360
<v Speaker 1>professor at the University of Buffalo. And Matt Larson, of

0:05:47.400 --> 0:05:51.160
<v Speaker 1>course Bloomberg Intelligence B. I go on the Bloomberg terminal

0:05:51.200 --> 0:05:52.600
<v Speaker 1>to see Matt's reports