Does the US have juristriction over the whole world?
ukcrypto at sourcetagged.ian.co.uk
Mon Nov 28 20:05:18 GMT 2011
On 27 Nov 2011, at 21:30, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ian Mason:
>> The difference between UK and US approaches is that UK law only
>> applies extraterritorially to UK subjects or to persons "owing a duty
>> to the crown".
> Compelling a UK subsidiary of a foreign company to produce evidence
> for use in a UK court does not look very extraterritorial to me.
> Globalization cuts both ways, there are increased opportunities and
> I think you actually want this because otherwise, UK companies with
> local ownership are at a competitive disadvantage.
I'm taking the, sometime unusual, tactic of speaking only of what I
know, which specifically was the spying reference where I know that
this approach to extra-territoriality exists.
Now I speculate - I don't think the UK courts would think they were
competent to order disclosure of information about a third party,
incidentally held on behalf of another third party by the (for
arguments sake) Australian subsidiary of a British Company. This is a
direct analogy to the claim MS are making about holding data 'in the
cloud' for an Australian company.
The case you suggest, of a foreign company domiciled in the UK is very
different. I don't think the courts would hesitate for a moment to
order disclosure from them - as long as there was a basic case for
More information about the ukcrypto