Microsoft today published a short blog
post stating that it feels that recent government changes to how it
reports surveillance activities are insufficient. Calling the decision
by the federal government to publish more information on the quantity of
consumer data requests relating to national security each year “a good
start,” Microsoft claims the Constitution demands more progress.
Microsoft cites the founding document several times in its post, also
declaring that it believes that it has “a clear right under the U.S.
Constitution to share more information with the public.”
In a rare moment of solidarity, Microsoft name-checked Google, saying
that the two companies agree that more must be made legally allowable
to disclose. Both companies are in litigation with the government for
the right to share more about what they are forced to hand to the
government. Specifically, Microsoft wants to disclose how often user
content such as the content of an email is demanded.
Revelations from documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward
Snowden to journalist Glenn Greenwald showed that through a program
called PRISM, the United States government requested hefty amounts of
user data from large Internet companies.
There are gag rules around what can be said regarding government data
requests. This stifles discussion, debate, and functional oversight of
the government by its ultimate leaders, the citizenry. Microsoft and
Google are also likely not particularly excited about sharing their
private user data with intelligence agencies.
Microsoft, citing a “failure of [its] recent negotiations” promises
to press forward with its lawsuit “in the hope that the courts will
uphold [its] right to speak more freely.” The company claims to have met
with the government on six different occasions. Microsoft indicated
that its suit was filed in June.
You don’t often see a company worth hundreds of billions go full
philosophy, but Microsoft went there (this appears to be a trend at the
company – I’m looking at you, Frank):
The United States has long been admired around the world for its leadership in promoting free speech and open discussion. We benefit from living in a country with a Constitution that guarantees the fundamental freedom to engage in free expression unless silence is required by a narrowly tailored, compelling Government interest.
We believe there remains a path forward that will share more information with the public while protecting national security. Our hope is that the courts and Congress will ensure that our Constitutional safeguards prevail.
Microsoft is not always on the right side of privacy issues. However,
in this case it is, and that is worth noting. Also, the combined Google
and Microsoft legal budget is formidable. Perhaps progress will be
made.
No comments:
Post a Comment