[atirip]

From the article "U.S. law enforcement could use the USA PATRIOT Act on a U.S.-based organisation, like Microsoft, Google, Dropbox or Amazon, for example, to force its local subsidiary companies across the world into handing over user data to U.S. authorities."

Exactly how? By my understanding a company in EU operates under EU law and US parent company is only stock owner. Stock owner can not by my understanding force the company to do anything if the company does not want. Lets assume that US company does not want to force daughter company, how can NSA to make them?

EDIT: I'm fully aware that by harassment or blackmail anything can be done, no question here. What I meant to inquiry, out of curiosity, is, is there a legal way to _force_. I know that parent company can control and fire board etc, but can they be forced to do so. Or more broadly, can some US agency take full control of US company and run it like they please. Can f.e. NSA if they really-really wan't to rise McDonalds burgerflippers salary by twofold? Does Patriot Act or something allow that?

[DannyBee]

Your understanding is false. A sole stockholder (for example, the parent of an independent subsidiary), always has control, even if not by specific direction.

They can, after all, fire the entire board, and elect a new one that will direct the company to do what they want.

Not to mention in most cases, parent companies do in fact, maintain control over subsidiaries (IE they are not independent subsidiaries), and thus can directly control activities.

[Kimmono]

The way company law is set up in Norway, you cant as a board member do anything else than what is best for the company you are board member in. Doing something different would mean you could be held responsible. They could fire the board, but the next board have the same rules to go by.

[DannyBee]

"What is best" is of course, a matter of opinion. I'm not sure this is as concrete as you seem to think this is, though i'll admit i'm not familiar with the details of norwegian law, what you say is true of most countries in terms of duties.

[mtgx]

> Lets assume that US company does not want to force daughter company, how can NSA to make them?

How can you still ask that question right now? Have you missed the whole Wikileaks scandal? All it took was one phone call for Amazon to take down their website. They didn't even need a court order or something.

I don't know what the laws are exactly, but in practice, and thanks to post-9/11 culture in law enforcement agencies, they can do whatever they want as long as they wave "national security" in front of them.

[toyg]

> US parent company is only stock owner

That is rarely the case. In most arrangements, foreign subsidiaries are still under direct control of the main company - do you really think "Google US" doesn't have a say in how "Google Ireland" operates?

There are tons of accountancy rules dealing exclusively with partially-owned-fully-controlled foreign companies, but when it comes to the Patriot Act, as long as there is even a shred of control from an American company, then all data held by the controlled company is subject to US laws, regardless of actual location. This is far from an expansive interpretation of the Act, tbh; it's just one of the many that have been tested in court.

[peteri]

Microsoft have already admitted this with respect to office 365.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/microsoft-admits-patri...

[Drakim]

As long as they have a presence in the US, it's in their best interest to act according to US laws. I don't think saying "while we have many US customers, we are technically positioned in Ireland" is going to cut it.

[Filligree]

Privacy laws in Europe are a bit of a mess (there being >1 country involved), and possibly stricter than the companies want to deal with.

So the information they're storing is, at least nominally, stored on computers owned by the american branches.