Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US Government: You Don't Own Your Cloud Data So We Can Access It At Any Time

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the you-can-trust-us dept.

Cloud 531

New submitter jest3r writes "On Tuesday the EFF filed a brief proposing a process for the Court in the Megaupload case to hold the government accountable for the actions it took (and failed to take) when it shut down Megaupload's service and denied third parties access to their property. Many businesses used Megaupload's cloud service to store and share files not related to piracy. The government is calling for a long, drawn-out process that would require individuals or small companies to travel to courts far away and engage in multiple hearings just to get their own property back. Additionally, the government's argument that you lose all your property rights by storing your data on the cloud could apply to Amazon's S3 or Google Apps or Apple iCloud services as well (see page 4 of their filing)."

cancel ×

531 comments

So.... (4, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855133)

Anyone surprised?

Re:So.... (5, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855143)

hey, what's that pressure I feel?

its the pressure of a boot, stomping on your face. pressing down, always pressing down.

Re:So.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855205)

The behavior of the Justice Department over the last few years is a good reason to boot Obama out, I think. Hopefully the next guy will have more control over his dogs than the current one.

Re:So.... (4, Insightful)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855253)

I believe warrantless wire taping started under Bush....*eye roll*

Re:So.... (1)

menno_h (2670089) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855329)

I believe warrantless wire taping started under Bush....*eye roll*

What about Hoover? (The FBI guy, not the engineer.) He _started_ the whole surveillance of government subjects thing.

Re:So.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855443)

I believe warrantless wire taping started under Bush....*eye roll*

What about Hoover? (The FBI guy, not the engineer.) He _started_ the whole surveillance of government subjects thing.

Of course not, you !(poster.political_alignment) crony. Open your eyes, man! It was clearly getPolitician(!(poster.political_alignment))'s work!

Re:So.... (3, Insightful)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855517)

Kind of irrelevant to the point. The o.p. stated the justice department is out of control under obama ignoring what the justice department did under bush - warrantless wire tapping, water boarding, enemy combatant, suspending Habeas corpus, indefinite detention....the list goes on...

Re:So.... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855493)

Wonderful how that excuses the continued erosion of our civil rights. "Well Bush did it."

What a great get out of jail card that is.

Re:So.... (3, Informative)

jcr (53032) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855527)

It started under Lincoln. The feds didn't bother with any legalities when snooping on telegraph communications.

-jcr

Re:So.... (5, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855679)

I believe warrantless wire taping started under Bush....*eye roll*

But this is certainly the first one someone claims you lose your rights to data by placing it with an external providers

I am sure that companies that provide storage lockers are watching this with interest. Next, on suspicion of drugs, seize the entire local U-Store branch... Or the entire contents of bank safebox room. And let the owners come forward and sue to recover if they can prove them own their stuff legally. (and imagine there was a car analogy somewhere in there)

Re:So.... (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855411)

That would be Romney... good luck there.

He's from the same faction that started this nonsense.

It's like leaving a guy that doesn't worship you enough for one that beats you black and blue every night.

Re:So.... (5, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855395)

Were the Rolling Stones singing to the US Government? HEY, YOU, GET OFF OF MY CLOUD!

One more reason to maintain your own data and backups. Like you say, this shouldn't have surprised anyone.

Re:So.... (2)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855703)

Anyone surprised?

Of course not. The US government is bald-facedly beholden only to corporations and turned the country into a true opressive totalitarian state. I have a real opportunity to live and work in Japan, I'm seriously considering taking the offering company up on it and sayng "fuck this".

Does this include backups. (4, Insightful)

Holi (250190) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855151)

Does this mean that my backups to Barracuda Networks cloud service are no longer mine? This would kill cloud services.

Re:Does this include backups. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855241)

Yes.

The US gov has long held that your webmail doesn't belong to you either.

The feds already have full access to your gmail or hotmail account, and everything in it.

DUH. It never was yours (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855267)

Does this mean that my backups to Barracuda Networks cloud service are no longer mine?

I don't get where supposed rational technical people on Slashdot of all places, think that any data they transmit over public networks NEVERMIND then storing said data on hard drives owned and physically controlled by someone else, was ever YOURS.

Forget law. The physical reality of the thing is that by definition, any data you are keeping on devices controlled by someone else is never really yours. You just might be able to access it, and even that is never guaranteed.

Cloud backups are great as a cheap last offsite resort but are not the same as backups that you physically control. You should never have data you care about recovering on a cloud service that you do not also have in multiple copies on devices you own.

Any other notion is just fantasy.

Re:DUH. It never was yours (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855397)

By your logic the money we keep in the bank isn't ours either.

Re:DUH. It never was yours (5, Funny)

Kahlandad (1999936) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855449)

or, for that matter, the skulls in my safety deposit box...

Re:DUH. It never was yours (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855485)

I don't get where supposed rational technical people on Slashdot of all places, think that any data they transmit over public networks NEVERMIND then storing said data on hard drives owned and physically controlled by someone else, was ever YOURS.

Sounds a lot like stuff transported over public roads.

You moved it in your car from your house a the local U-Haul storage locker. You used an Interstate Highway. Therefore it's not really your property. Now the government can come and take it at will. Great logic there.

Re:DUH. It never was yours (2, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855671)

thank you.

the tranport has NOTHING, NOTHING to do with your privacy and rights.

why link the two? this is playing into their trap!

"oh, but you stored it blah and it went over blah and it left your house ..."

so fucking what!

seriously - so what. and I wrapped it in a blue envelope and its 'we hate blue envelopes day' today so we get to keep it.

arbitrary reasons, repeated many times, does not make them have any more sense and reason.

yes, my data went over wires I don't own. SO FUCKING WHAT!

what's next: anything that's not kept in your hands 100% of the time is open to be taken away? where does this encroachment end?

Re:DUH. It never was yours (1)

Alien Being (18488) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855665)

If we're supposed and allowed to forget the law, then I know a few great ways to improve the government.

Re:Does this include backups. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855413)

Hence the reason I have moved all my data back under my direct physical control albeit in an internal cloud-model. The Government might seize my domain names (DNS records) for externally accessible, internally stored information resources but the data remains mine...all mine. { evil laughter }

Why does ownership matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855155)

If I let my friend borrow something, the Feds are allowed to come in his house and steal it, because he doesn't own it?

gov just destroyed the cloud business (5, Insightful)

RichMan (8097) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855171)

Nice move government you just destroyed pretty much all of the cloud computing industry.

Huzzah.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (4, Insightful)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855243)

Nice move government you just destroyed pretty much all of the cloud computing industry.

Huzzah.

Yeah. Say you're a business relying on cloud storage/computing:

1. Use cloud services

2. Someone else also using cloud service suspected of doing something illegal.

3. Service provider shut down/seized by feds.

4. No profit.

There's not even room for the ambiguity of a "???" in that sequence.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855303)

Don't forget that you are now branded a criminal in the eyes of the government because you happened to be using the same service for legitimate business needs.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (4, Insightful)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855565)

It wouldn't be such a problem if they would stop shutting the whole damn thing down whenever someone does something wrong. They don't need to do that. I'm surprised they haven't figured out they could get by without a lot of whining/protesting if they just stop using a bulldozer when a hammer is appropriate.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855289)

Well at least some good came of this case.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855375)

Still good for backups, as long as you encrypt the data before uploading it.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855559)

Still good for backups, as long as you encrypt the data before uploading it.

Or if the data doesn't need encryption - it just needs backup. For example, I have my photos (kids soccer games, graduations, etc.) on a server at home. I have a script copy it every night to one of my other machines. From there, it goes to a cloud provider. But these don't need any encryption. (I can see how some people might have photos that need encryption due to things like trade secrets, illegal or questionable activities, etc.). I also send up my tax files. But they get encrypted first. If the government shuts the cloud provider down, I move to a different one - they are just my offsite backup in case my house burns down or a burglar takes all of my computers. It is doubtful that the cloud provider gets shut down at the same time as my house burns down - so I feel pretty safe having this info both in the cloud and on multiple spindles at home.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (4, Insightful)

mlts (1038732) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855407)

Realistically, what might end up happening is that some startup gets off the ground whose sole function in life is to provide an in-house encryption appliance similar to a HSM. Data goes in to the module, encrypted data gets stored in the cloud. All keys are kept in a "physically secure" 1U rack module with a USB port in front so one can back up the keys stored in the device.

Businesses will buy those encryption appliances, and IT goes on as normal.

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855437)

not if you're in the business of setting up private clouds

Re:gov just destroyed the cloud business (1)

Ice Tiger (10883) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855555)

Fantastic, I'm off to start a cloud hosting service outside the US as the government just killed their industry dead!

Hint to cloud industry: use your money to buy some laws in your favour.

Flipside (5, Interesting)

areusche (1297613) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855173)

Does this mean that all of those copyrighted works I am hosting "in the cloud" are no longer the property of their respected copyright holders? I can see this being argued in all sorts of funny ways.

Re:Flipside (5, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855377)

Does this mean that all of those copyrighted works I am hosting "in the cloud" are no longer the property of their respected copyright holders? I can see this being argued in all sorts of funny ways.

No no, see, because those rights holders have lots of very expensive lawyers on retainer. Do you? Thought not.

Re:Flipside (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855379)

No. If you read 300 word synopsis, you'll understand why this was a silly thing to say.

Re:Flipside (3, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855511)

You are an individual. Your rights are irrelevant if a corporation might lose money when your rights an enforced. Well, only those corporations that have friends in high places, like movie studios. Actually, it's just turtles all the way down, by which I mean corrupt major party politicians all the way up.

Re:Flipside (1)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855695)

No, because those companies didn't put it in the cloud.

However, since you don't own the data in the cloud either, that should effectively mean that you cannot be sued for copyright infringement either.

Should - not "does".

However - a more pertinent question arises: Does that mean that anyone selling ebooks via Amazon's store do not own the copyright to those books? I'm pretty sure Amazon stores those books "in the cloud" as well.

Bullshit. (5, Informative)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855189)

>Additionally, the government's argument that you lose all your property rights by storing your data on the cloud

Bullshit. I don't lose the rights to my property if they are in the temporary posession of a third party. If it was so, then nobody could rent anythiing ever or even check a coat.

Hurr.

--
BMO

Re:Bullshit. (5, Interesting)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855321)

Actually you do for cloud services. Read the contracts that Google has....so the government can argue you don't have any expectation of property rights if you waive them with the cloud carrier. Then again, you could argue, the contract is between you and google and not the government. Therefore the government cannot assume it gets the same rights, as set force in the contract, as the cloud carrier.

Oooo the arguments....

Re:Bullshit. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855479)

No you dont... you should read the agreements... they are very clear that you still own your works... but that you grant them unlimited rights to reproduce them.

Re:Bullshit. (2)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855569)

And allow them to manipulate them as well. That's hardly property rights if they can reproduce them ad-hoc.

Re:Bullshit. (4, Interesting)

scsirob (246572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855327)

This is like the government saying that your car no longer belongs to you when you park it on a public road. Bullshit indeed.

Re:Bullshit. (3, Insightful)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855417)

Public road is not the same as a cloud service. The better analogy would be parking garage.

Re:Bullshit. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855349)

Maybe the government is more like a jackass friend. You still "own" that nice suede jacket with the candy stripe lining, but you're never getting it back.

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855463)

Well, the banks seem to think that your money is theirs. So, why not?

Re:Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855705)

You see that's the problem with the U.S. where I come from if you touch something it's yours [youtube.com] .

Need more cloud services like Dropbox (2)

sandytaru (1158959) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855203)

At least with Drop box, even if the cloud goes down I still have all my local copies. Won't stop the feds from digging around my data, but at least I won't have to fight in court to get it back.

All of our BDR servers also run on a triplicate model - the original data, the data on the backup server, and a copy of the most critical data in the cloud just in case the building catches on fire.

Wow, just wow... (2)

who_stole_my_kidneys (1956012) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855207)

not sure why I'm surprised at the stupidity of this and how it impacts every cloud computing business. So long Amazon cloud service, Azure, Google, and any other service that claims protection in the cloud.

Re:Wow, just wow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855629)

IMHO, this move hurts the government more than it helps. It isn't far-fetched to just encrypt your data locally before sending it up. Even clients like FastGlacier have built in AES encryption.

When this gets out, what we would see is clients (or hardware appliances at the enterprise level) have an encryption layer coupled with some way of managing keys, and that would be that. The era of catching a dumb bad guy because they stashed their illegal stuff in the cloud would be over because even Joe Pedobear in the basement will know enough to encrypt things.

Before encryption layers going in common use, the USG could unofficially get data and look at it. Now, all of that is gone, so passive snooping is out of the picture, and it forces active compromise of an endpoint which is a lot more difficult. We see the same thing with IP tracking. With million dollar verdicts against someone whose IP was logged in a BitTorrent swarm, even casual users know to use a VPN provider, which makes snooping for the real bad stuff almost impossible.

The next step? Actively ban encryption and VPN use? Businesses (which control the government) will hear nothing of that.

All and all a dumb move... just means that the seized content will be encrypted.

Re:Wow, just wow... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855649)

Look, it's not hard.

If you don't want it to be readable by random schmucks, encrypt it before you stick it in the cloud. You should have been doing that anyway.

What about money? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855211)

Most of my money is "stored" by my bank, backed by promissory notes which in turn are notionally backed by gold deposits stored in some other location that my bank doesn't know about. It's all in the cloud, and has been my entire life. Do I still have property rights over that?

Re:What about money? (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855279)

Fortunately there are specific laws saying that your money is still yours when you store it in a bank. But apparently the DOJ thinks that the same principle doesn't apply to data unless there's a law specifically saying so.

Re:What about money? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855299)

Wow is that ever out-of-date. Money has not been backed by gold since Nixon I believe.

Re:What about money? (1)

zill (1690130) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855335)

which in turn are notionally backed by gold deposits stored in some other location that my bank doesn't know about

We abandoned the gold standard years ago, old man. No currency on Earth is backed by gold right now.

Re:What about money? (3, Interesting)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855513)

which in turn are notionally backed by gold deposits stored in some other location that my bank doesn't know about

We abandoned the gold standard years ago, old man. No currency on Earth is backed by gold right now.

Interestingly, that makes his fundamental argument/question about "cloud money" even better, since money is really data now.

Re:What about money? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855663)

Are you omniscient? That's a pretty large claim to make.

Re:What about money? (2)

GravityStar (1209738) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855381)

Property rights? Over money stored at a bank? In a bank-account?

Sorry, you don't own that money. The only thing you have is credit. The bank promises to give you that amount of money when you ask for it. That's all.

So, well, the answer is; no.

Re:What about money? (1)

SmaryJerry (2759091) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855429)

This is exactly what I was thinking! I guess now we need to get our data FDIC insured also?

The Cloud just rained out (1)

kawabago (551139) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855213)

Maybe that's what caused Sandy?

Re:The Cloud just rained out (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855509)

Along the goofy metaphor and references lines, I was thinking "Hey (hey) You (you) Get Off-a My Cloud!"

local storage FTW (3, Insightful)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855225)

cloud storage is an easy target: it hosts data of many individuals, and is a single entity. Of course govt will want easy access to that, since that's a lot simpler than requesting access from each person separately.

And that is why I never wanted to use cloud storage. I didn't need it also, to be honest. I always prefer my personal servers that I manage myself, and can encrypt & backup at my own desire.

Re:local storage FTW (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855415)

You can encrypt cloud storage as well. You should, in fact, if the data is even moderately private.

Notebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855227)

If I leave a notebook (paper one) at a friends house, or at work, do I no longer own the data inside of it?

Re:Notebook (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855391)

Not the same thing. You are storing contents in a cloud service. The questions becomes: does the property owner lose his/her property rights when their property is being stored? I would think the the obvious answer is no. It doesn't matter if the property is electronic. Thus existing case law on people using storage facilities and law enforcement needing warrants to search storage facilities would apply.

Re:Notebook (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855677)

It doesn't matter if the property is electronic

That is because there is no electronic property; the only property would be the computers themselves, and there is no question about who those belong to. The whole argument is nonsensical from the start, designed to confuse people with a poor abstraction so that they will side with (unsurprisingly) the group that makes the most money from tougher copyright/patent/trademark/trade secret enforcement.

If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (2)

ilikenwf (1139495) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855231)

GPG and LUKS for the win!

Recursively placed truecrypt drives for your financial documents, cat pictures, and whatever else you REALLY don't want them to see.

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (3, Informative)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855273)

This is Kimdotcom's next move.

His new project encrypts on the local machine before uploading to the server, and it's transparent to the user to make it easy.

http://kim.com/mega/ [kim.com]

I'm surprised it took someone this long to think of this.

--
BMO

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (1)

ilikenwf (1139495) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855301)

Yup...and he requires it not be hosted in the US. I'm losing pride in my country on a daily basis.

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (1)

http (589131) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855699)

You should have lost all of it as of November 25, 2002.

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855357)

That doesn't mean you'll get the data back if they seize it, though.

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (1)

ilikenwf (1139495) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855459)

Better than being implicated as they search the data that supposedly is no longer yours. What are they going to do, arrest you and beat you with a wrench for the encryption key?

Re:If you don't want them seeing it, encrypt! (1, Funny)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855525)

>What are they going to do, arrest you and beat you with a wrench for the encryption key?

Yes

http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com]

--
BMO

Safe Deposit Boxes? (5, Interesting)

mveloso (325617) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855251)

Shouldn't the EFF argue that a cloud service is the equivalent of a bank's safe deposit box? Someone else holds your property on your behalf. For SDBs, the government needs a warrant...just like if your stuff was in the cloud.

Re:Safe Deposit Boxes? (1)

DutchUncle (826473) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855531)

Mod parent up. Same would apply to a self-storage company, or a moving-and-storage company, or any warehousing or storage business. And what about private carriers like UPS and FedEx - you're handing over physical custody of an item, but nobody would suggest that it stops being your property.

Great! (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855265)

The MPAA's members upload movies to "the cloud" all the time, so I guess their "property" rights are forfeited! Hooray!

for that copy only and that how the ISS (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855291)

for that copy only and that how the ISS gets movies for free.

Re:for that copy only and that how the ISS (1)

ilikenwf (1139495) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855365)

Maybe the ISS should start seeding and not just leeching, then.

Re:for that copy only and that how the ISS (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855465)

Not just for that copy, but also for every subsequent copy of that copy. For example, the copy Netflix sends me when I stream a movie (yes, it is a copy, in a technical sense). Or the copy Comcast sends when I watch cable.

The real answer is, "The government's argument only applies to real, individual people. Fake persons who are really groups of wealthy people (some called these organizations corporations) will have their rights enforced at the expensive of the citizens of the US or any other country."

But "cloud" is just another word for "internet". (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855323)

If data on the "cloud" is not your own, is any data on a computer outside your property lines your own?

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855343)

Any and all Federal Property guarded by a private company is not actually owned by the gov? Cool, I think I'm gonna get me a new ride.

What is happen to banks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855359)

Since most of my "money" is electronic funds in the cloud?

I've made this argument for *years* (5, Informative)

oneiros27 (46144) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855361)

The courts established a long time ago that you don't have the same property rights under the 4th amendment when it's stored with a third party.

I've raised this issue whenever I hear that a legal office has outsourced their mail service (do they still have attorney-client privilege if the information has been 'shared' with the ISP?)

There are two issues -- (1) does it require a warrant and (2) do they have to notify you of the warrant (so that you can contest it) or only the party holding the information?

There was an article on the topic in the Journal of Consitutional Law [upenn.edu] a couple of years ago. One of the key things -- ECPA considers any email stored for 180 days can be obtained from an ISP without notifying the user. There was a case in 2008 that found that argued against it and the court agreed, but the case was overturned on other issues so the decision never stood as a precident. It has some interesting things to consider, such as the issues with using a cloud-based thing client without knowing it (in the example, a kid setting up a computer for his uncle), and losing their fourth amendment rights.

This is no surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855385)

In today's America, you don't own anything that the government doesn't want you to own.
Heck, the Supreme Court ruled that the government can come in and take your house [ij.org] if they feel like selling it to a developer for cheap.
But to make the Feds' job a little bit harder, I hope that everyone will use the Freedom Box [freedomboxfoundation.org] once it is available.
And get a real, privacy-protecting VPN [airvpn.org] while they are still legal, rather than a fake with a catchy name [slashdot.org] .

Always a reason... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855439)

So THAT's why the price of HDDs and SSDs jumped up this morning.....

And no matter who wins the prize in the elections, we will all get screwed just as deep. Obamaloney has proven weak in the flesh and incapable of tearing down any of the human rights violations instituted by his predecessor. Romnesia, that sleazy corporate panderer, will do ANYTHING to please his big business buddies and masters.

But be happy! If anyone ends up pregnant from this institutionalized rape, it's God's will, like the senator said. Halleluja!!!

Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855457)

Face it, the new US government doesn't care about rules and regulations anymore. They can pressure almost any country now to "cooperate" with them so they can change the laws of those countries, or just force them to give up any information they want on anyone. They can even pressure the government to send special forces to kidnap someone in their own country! (see Dotcom) Anyone going against them is called a terrorist or an enemy of the state. The word freedom has lost all its meaning, it's now just an excuse used by the ones in power to excuse their actions against their own citizens or anyone they feel threatened by. The worst part is that they now have too much power, and I don't see anyway to deviate from this ongoing abuse of laws. In video games there could be a "chosen one" that can around and change the world, but reality is darker than that. It just feels like this is going to get much worse in the next 10-20 years, I wonder how many "freedoms" we will have left then.

From the Declaration of Independence. (1)

scorp1us (235526) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855471)

Way to steal one from the King George III

"He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures."

Re: From the Declaration of Independence. (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855597)

Yeah that's nice, but shouldn't you be working your corporate job and focusing on making yourself wealthier? Nobody is threatening your right to try to climb the ladder (you never really had a right to get anywhere), so stop complaining and get back to work; the big boys need to decide how you will be fed your propa^H^H^H^Hentertainment.

So what? (2, Insightful)

lennier1 (264730) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855477)

When the governments of the USA and Iran are using the same playbook you shouldn't really be surprised by stuff like this.

Then I won't be using the cloud. FULL STOP. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855553)

Welcome to the new totalitarian state of the "land of the free".

All you idiots who think you are free make me want to vomit.

Business model (1)

istartedi (132515) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855573)

1. Rent some cars.
2. Employ the same logic.
3. Profit!

Manager (as I hand him a handful of undesirable leftover parts): We expected you to return the car with a full tank of gas.

Me: I bet you expected your cloud-hosted customer data to be private too.

Devil's in the EULA (1)

Rawlsian (2753963) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855581)

From page 4 of the brief:

"Any ownership interest by Mr. Goodwin in [the copies of his data that remain on Carpathia's servers] would be limited by at least two separate agreements: (1) the contract between Carpathia and Megaupload regarding Megaupload's use of Carpathia's servers; and, more specifically, (2) the written agreement between Megaupload and Mr. Goodwin regarding use of Megaupload's service."

The government's argument isn't about inherent ownership in copies, but the impact of relevant contracts to the ownership interest. The line of argument isn't good news (and hasn't been adjudicated) but it is cause for cloud storage providers and users to closely examine how their contractual arrangements address the issue of whose property the cloud-stored copies are.

When you pay peanuts you get monkeys. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855583)

I try to own my own hardware and supply my own services.
The cost/maintenence is a factor that is maybe not for everyone, but it makes me appreciate it even more so when I hear shit like this happening.
I trust myself much more than any corporation, and if you don't, you definitely need your head read.

Banks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855595)

So money is no longer yours if it's stored in a bank?

Let me make sure I understand this. (1)

3seas (184403) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855605)

So any software or data that is on the hardware I own those who created, other than myself, it lose their property rights?
So software patents and copyrights don't really exist?

I believe the term is "Non sequitur"

Re:Let me make sure I understand this. (1)

i_ate_god (899684) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855651)

this is slashdot, data isn't property to begin with, let's not kid ourselves here.

HIPAA and the cloud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41855637)

Hold it! The Government requires that all medical data be readily available if online (see HIPAA). If your data is stored on a cloud service and they shut it down, who is responsible if it isn't available? Oh that's right, the government is never responsible for anything it does...

I don't own what's in a safe deposit box? (1)

ebunga (95613) | about a year and a half ago | (#41855641)

Seriously, that's the argument they're making.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...