I could imagine that there are implications for tech companies now operating in the UK if they’re subject to raids by the British police force. It sets a dangerous precedent.
Facebook in the UK is wholly subject to the decisions of Facebook in the US. He may not be a British subject, but his business operates in the UK. All business in the UK should be subject to UK law and regulation and the officers accountable. It should not matter if the law is old or the company has a head office elsewhere. Same for companies operating in other countries.
If I choose to start operating my business in the USA I would reasonably expect to be subject to US law, and accountable to it.
And before you ask what's wrong with that, let's not forget that Saudi Arabia, China, and I'm sure 5 other countries have forced Facebook/Google/Microsoft/... to hand over data and then used it to execute gays and dissidents. Even in the UK case, it's pushing hard for these companies to just hand over all data they have to their secret service (not even limited to UK citizens).
You know, to "protect the children".
It's like how your little website may do things that are not ok in country X and you don't care, but if you want people and businesses from country X to be able to spend money on your website then you need to care.
Nations, including and often starting with the USA, want internet companies to obey their laws. That shouldn't still surprise.
In the case of less savoury regimes I would prefer that Facebook, Google or whoever would respond ethically and choose to withdraw rather than compromise thousands of people to make a few extra dollars. Better yet I'd prefer that data sharing with such places was legislated against.
They are registered companies. They have head offices. They have regional offices. They own entire datacentres. They are traded on stock exchanges. They trade for money with customers in countries all over the world. They are not above the law.
Legally, is Facebook any different than say, 3M or IBM? Both are US corporations with offices, manufacturing and distribution facilities in the UK. They are obviously subject to UK law. The precise location of particular data stored by the company, and servers accessing the data, seems a very odd criterion upon which to argue that the company is not subject to the rule of law. The company exists as a legal entity in the UK, it has offices and employees, and customers. It does have a presence. And it should absolutely be required to obey the law of the land.
(A few years ago, I might have had a slightly different view. But companies like Facebook and Google have taken such gross liberties with the law, and even the fundamental functioning of democracy itself, that I think there's an urgent need for them to be reigned in, harshly. They brought it entirely upon themselves.)
Don't you think the U.S. would not have done the same (probably would've done much sooner) if a company was repeatedly turning up its nose and thumbing it?
This is kind of tautologous; if you're in the UK, suspected of having committed a crime, or certain other infractions (health and safety etc), you can be raided. It's more surprising when the FBI managed to do a raid in New Zealand.
I don’t think a dangerous precedent has been set. I think foreign tech should be aware right from the start, if you break the law you and your staff will be punished.
It’s the same deal for UK firms working in US. HSBC was quite rightly punished for money laundering in the US.