The Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2Coalition) signed on to an amicus brief arguing that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York failed to properly analyze the extraterritorial application of the Stored Communications Act. i2Coalition Co-Founder and Public Policy Chair David Snead released the following statement regarding thebrief:
“The issues in this case go to the very heart of the debate the world is having about government access to data and the flow of data across borders. The i2Coalition has been a prime advocate of the position that any access to data must respect not only the laws of multiple jurisdictions, but the expectations of customers who entrust their data to infrastructure providers.
“U.S. laws provide a mechanism for balancing the needs of governments to access data outside the U.S. with those expectations, and the District court’s decision did not properly take these into account. The i2Coalition does not believe that Congress intended the Stored Communications Act to be applied in an extraterritorial manner.
“In this case the i2Coalition and other amici advocate a balancing test that allows courts to take into consideration the multiple factors at issue in compelling infrastructure providers to disclose data outside the U.S.
“The i2Coalition also believes that governments can use currently existing processes, like Multilateral Legal Assistance Treaties, to gain access to data stored outside their physical jurisdiction. While these treaties are not perfect, the i2Coalition does not believe that the remedy to this imperfection is trampling on the expectations of customers and the decisions that other countries have made regarding expectations of privacy their citizens should have in data.
“The I2Coalition remains concerned that decisions such as the District court’s decision, combined with other revelations regarding U.S. access to data abroad, fundamentally undermine confidence that the U.S. is committed to respecting the laws of other countries. Decisions such as the District Court’s decision significantly impact U.S. businesses by undermining confidence in the ability of these businesses to keep information confidential, and comply with global privacy expectations.”