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

[Wild Cobra]

As ElNoNo pointed out below, there are tons of benefits to cloud computing/storage. Lack of physical ownership is pretty much the only downside.

Seems like a pretty big one to me. Only a fool would store something important there.

[mouse]

Isn't this action a form of Piracy in itself?




Next stop for the Government.

[ElNono]

Seems like a pretty big one to me. Only a fool would store something important there.

People do it all the time, including probably you. After all, you didn't write the software you keep your important data on, did you? Because if you didn't write it, you sure as don't own it.

[Wild Cobra]

People do it all the time, including probably you. After all, you didn't write the software you keep your important data on, did you? Because if you didn't write it, you sure as don't own it.

Anything important, I keep close at hand. Such sites are good for emergency backups, but to to keep data there, and remove from nearby physical storage to free up space... no.

[mouse]

Having your data stored in a remote location is like asking a crackhead to deposit a roll of 20 dollar bills in the bank each day.

[ElNono]

Anything important, I keep close at hand. Such sites are good for emergency backups, but to to keep data there, and remove from nearby physical storage to free up space... no.

It's not just a matter of storage, and what you deem important is irrelevant. Companies can use cloud services for example to distribute updates to their applications. Gives them uptime they can't provide on their own, increases reliability on their products, etc. Having the update out there is important to them, and the update itself is their property. The govt claim that you lose property ownership because you placed a file somewhere is simply idiotic.

Cloud services are much more than storage too. Amazon lets you purchase multi-server setups with variable amount of processors, etc. You get computing power, their data center uptime, redundancy and backup facilities, all for a small fee. It's basically providing a data center to even the small guys that otherwise couldn't afford it. Entire businesses are run on the cloud out of necessity alone.

Lastly, GMail, hotmail, yahoo mail, et all are cloud-based services. All the emails, calendars, contacts stored there are all in the cloud.

[LnGrrrR]

Seems like a pretty big one to me. Only a fool would store something important there.

Define "important"? For instance, if you've ever bought anything from Amazon, they've likely stored your former purchases in their database. Using the government's argument, they could ask Amazon to give them the info on what you've bought/browsed lately.

[ElNono]

Define "important"? For instance, if you've ever bought anything from Amazon, they've likely stored your former purchases in their database. Using the government's argument, they could ask Amazon to give them the info on what you've bought/browsed lately.

Or his address, or his credit card information... only a fool!

[LnGrrrR]

Or his address, or his credit card information... only a fool!

I guess if you never want to use a cell phone, or purchase/pay for anything online, or use email, then you won't have to worry about the government's argument.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

so I guess cloud technology can be added to the always-expanding list (climate change, mathematics, finance, taxes, etc.) of what Wild Cobra is an expert on

[Wild Cobra]

It's not just a matter of storage, and what you deem important is irrelevant. Companies can use cloud services for example to distribute updates to their applications. Gives them uptime they can't provide on their own, increases reliability on their products, etc. Having the update out there is important to them, and the update itself is their property. The govt claim that you lose property ownership because you placed a file somewhere is simply idiotic.

Cloud services are much more than storage too. Amazon lets you purchase multi-server setups with variable amount of processors, etc. You get computing power, their data center uptime, redundancy and backup facilities, all for a small fee. It's basically providing a data center to even the small guys that otherwise couldn't afford it. Entire businesses are run on the cloud out of necessity alone.

Lastly, GMail, hotmail, yahoo mail, et all are cloud-based services. All the emails, calendars, contacts stored there are all in the cloud.

Now You are going outside the complaint. Wasn't there a legal complain claiming they want their data back?

[ElNono]

Now You are going outside the complaint. Wasn't there a legal complain claiming they want their data back?

They want their property back (in the form of data). The government is claiming they don't have property rights over that data anymore.

Property can come in a plethora of ways: programs, databases, archives... they might want it back or they might not want the government to have it. It's their property, so it should be up to them to decide who can have it.

[Wild Cobra]

They have their property then. They lost a copy of it. I don't understand your point I guess. I don't see it as a big deal. You work with someone else, and they have a tragedy... That happens all the time.

[ElNono]

They have their property then. They lost a copy of it. I don't understand your point I guess. I don't see it as a big deal. You work with someone else, and they have a tragedy... That happens all the time.

No doubt, seeing yet another terrible answer.

If "someone else has a terrible tragedy" how does that change ownership of my data? It doesn't.

[Wild Cobra]

But you still have your data. How can you possible expect to retrieve or destroy every copy?

[ElNono]

But you still have your data. How can you possible expect to retrieve or destroy every copy?

The same way that if Microsoft tells you to destroy your copy of Windows, you are legally required to do so. You never owned windows, you simply bought a license to a use it.

Microsoft owns it, you don't. Any "tragedy" that might happen to you or Microsoft doesn't change that.

[Wild Cobra]

LOL....

Where is that legal determination?

Wasn't there something years back that a legal decision contrary to that?

I think you are stretching. Really now...

[ElNono]

Where is that legal determination?

Wasn't there something years back that a legal decision contrary to that?

Nope. It's in the license agreement you agreed to before installing Windows. It's just like any other contract it's under contract law.

Change of ownership requires an explicit transfer. Even if you want to place something in the public domain before your IP protection expires, you must expressly do so (ie: indicate at the time of distribution that you're relinquishing your property rights)

[Wild Cobra]

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.

How is this different than physical property?

[Wild Cobra]

Nope. It's in the license agreement you agreed to before installing Windows. It's just like any other contract it's under contract law.

Change of ownership requires an explicit transfer. Even if you want to place something in the public domain before your IP protection expires, you must expressly do so (ie: indicate at the time of distribution that you're relinquishing your property rights)

Then Microsoft would have the right to have a time-bomb on the operating system, and eat itself up. Why don't they?

[ElNono]

Then Microsoft would have the right to have a time-bomb on the operating system, and eat itself up. Why don't they?

They've had one since Vista. Change enough of your hardware, and you have to revalidate your license with Microsoft. If you don't, Windows goes into a crippled mode.

Also since Vista, if you don't authorize your copy over the internet, Windows goes into crippled mode too. With this system Microsoft is also able to revoke your license anytime they want.

[LnGrrrR]

WC, I thought you said once that you read the entirety of all the licenses/agreements you sign?

The point is that I have an agreement with a company, and they are willing to store some amount of data for me, that the government shouldn't have the right to see that data whenever they want, or that I don't "own" that data just because I don't own the physical means of storage.

[ploto]

My experience at work has been that IT has switched alot of things off of our own servers. It is supposed to be cheaper overall (I think) and also be much better for them with regards to updates. For me, however, it has produced much more time where the primary system that I need to do my work is down. We can do nothing about it because it is not on our servers, but instead is hosted on the servers of the company whose product it is. Their servers seem to go down much more often than ours ever did. I have no clue as to their agreement and who owns what data.

[ElNono]

My experience at work has been that IT has switched alot of things off of our own servers. It is supposed to be cheaper overall (I think) and also be much better for them with regards to updates. For me, however, it has produced much more time where the primary system that I need to do my work is down. We can do nothing about it because it is not on our servers, but instead is hosted on the servers of the company whose product it is. Their servers seem to go down much more often than ours ever did. I have no clue as to their agreement and who owns what data.

I'm personally not much of a fan, and we do run a good chunk of our own servers, but when you start to scale up, costs can really go up and you really can't beat companies like Amazon or Google when it comes to uptime and redundancy, tbh...