Jonathan Stempel

A federal appeals court said Microsoft and other companies cannot be forced to turn over customer e-mails stored on servers outside the United States. The 3-0 decision by a panel of the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in New York was a victory for privacy advocates, as well as for technology companies hoping to offer cloud computing and other services to customers around the world.

Circuit Judge Susan Carney said communications held by US service providers on servers located outside the United States are beyond the reach of domestic search warrants issued under the Stored Communications Act, a 1986 federal law. "Congress did not intend the SCA's warrant provisions to apply extraterritorially," she wrote. "The focus of those provisions is protection of a user's privacy interests." Microsoft had been challenging a warrant seeking e-mails stored on a server in Dublin, Ireland, in a narcotics case. It was believed to be the first US company to challenge a domestic search warrant seeking data held outside the country. July 14's decision reversed a July 2014 ruling by then-Chief Judge Loretta Preska of the US District Court in Manhattan requiring Microsoft to turn over the e-mails. It also voided a contempt finding against the company.

The US government need not turn over a secret surveillance court's orders or the names of phone companies helping it collect call records, because it might reveal methods needed to protect national security, a federal judge decided.

US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, rejected the Electronic Frontier Foundation's argument that the US Department of Justice should turn over the materials, in the wake of unauthorized disclosures in 2013 by a former National Security Agency contractor, Edward Snowden.

Apple won preliminary court approval for its $450 million settlement of claims it harmed consumers by conspiring with five publishers to raise e-book prices.

In approving the accord, US District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan overcame concerns she had expressed over a settlement provision allowing Apple to pay just $70 million if related litigation were to drag out.

US District Judge Paul Grewal rejected Google’s bid to dismiss a privacy lawsuit claiming it commingled user data across different products and disclosed that data to advertisers without permission.

Saying his decision was a close call, Judge Grewal ruled that Google must face breach of contract and fraud claims by users of Android-powered devices who had downloaded at least one Android application through Google Play.

Other parts of the lawsuit were dismissed, including claims brought on behalf of account users who switched to non-Android devices from Android devices after Google changed its privacy policy in 2012 to allow the commingling.

Four major Silicon Valley companies have formally agreed to pay $324.5 million to settle claims brought by employees accusing them of colluding not to poach each other’s talent.

The settlement, between Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe Systems and roughly 64,000 workers, was disclosed in papers filed with the federal court in San Jose, California.

US District Judge Lucy Koh has been asked to preliminarily approve the accord at a June 19 hearing, over an objection by one of the four named plaintiffs. That plaintiff, Michael Devine, said the settlement let the companies off too easily. The settlement gives workers only a few thousand dollars each on average. The companies’ combined profit in their latest fiscal years was about $60 billion, with three-fifths coming from Apple.