[bjt]

A Brazilian company with a presence in the US could absolutely be subject to a US court order without any court in Brazil needing to be involved. You don't get to dodge the laws of a country you're operating in just because your HQ is in some other country.

[msh]

But whatsapp don't have a business presence in Brazil.

Just because they have users there is not the same as a business presence.

[hhandoko]

Good point.

I suppose this could be a reason why they require a third party (the telcos) to block access to WhatsApp, as they are operating under Brazilian law.

[sdm]

Does whatsapp make money from users in Brazil? Then yes, it has a business presence in Brazil.

[msh]

No, that's not the international legal definition for a business presence.

My point is that Brazil should follow legal procedures and have a American judge issue a supena. That's what a MLAT is for.

[lagadu]

They are following legal procedures. Brazilian ones, which are the only ones they have to care about. Why would they possibly care in the slightest what American courts have to say?

[msh]

Because they want to enforce their law against a american company.

There are a reason many countries have MLAT's

[Daishiman]

They have paid users.