Microsoft Privacy Defence Delays Police Options

[HamSandwhich]

if i had been the cops i would have nicked(arrested) all the people at ms for perverting the course of justice, they have info about a criminal WHO BROKE INTO PEOPLES HOUSES and wont tell, thats bound to be against the law, what happens if he broke into somebodys house and killed somebody while ms knew all along who he was and where he lived and didnt tell the police.

Who says it actually was the police that asked for his details?

[TooDumb2BScared]

Some of the replies on here made me want to post. So I registered, and now have to throw in my 2 cents.

If some of you had actually taken the time to read the whole article, it would have been obvious how the police found out this XBox was stolen.

The victim had his 360 stolen, so the victim called Microsoft to report the theft, he was told the machine had already been registered. The victim then complained to police, who contacted Microsoft.

"The Xbox 360 and games, valued at more than $700, were among items stolen on January 23 from a Mt Victoria property."

"The saga began when a man accused of receiving a stolen Xbox 360 contacted Microsoft to register the stolen machine - and to ask for a replacement power cord.

Police suspected that the man had links to a burglary ring in Wellington, but Microsoft would not pass details to police till they obtained a court-issued search warrant - nearly two weeks after the theft.

The next day, a man telephoned Microsoft, quoting the stolen Xbox's serial number and asking for a new power cord - which had been left behind in the theft. Microsoft recorded the man's name, phone number and address to mail him the part.

The victim of the theft is furious Microsoft knew the man's details and was not more helpful, especially given that others may also have been burgled by the same accused."

I am sure any one of you would be upset if your XBox was stolen and some lamer registered it and you had to wait for its return because it took so long.


Detective Sergeant Martin Todd said Microsoft was acting within its rights and had no legal obligation to help. "Microsoft haven't been obstructive in any way," Mr Todd said.

The alleged receiver of the stolen Xbox had now been arrested and charged.

A 14-year-old had admitted the theft and two others in the area.

Kensington Swan privacy law specialist Hayden Wilson said New Zealand's Privacy Act required companies to protect private information "unless it's required in order to avoid prejudice to the maintenance of the law".

In this case, most New Zealand-based companies would have released the information without a court order.

But if the American-based company held the information, it was not bound by New Zealand laws. Microsoft also had a duty to protect its client's information, he said.

I would have to disagree with this part also. If Microsoft wants to do business in NZ, it should have to obey those laws also.

Microsoft has given up information on many other criminals. The last one that comes to mind is the BTK Strangler in Kansas. He was tracked by the Word documents he sent on floppy disks. Microsoft Word digitally signs files, that gives the computer's registration information in the document of the computer that created the document.

I expect less privacy with Vista.

BTW I think MS sucks - They wouldn't warranty my launch day 360 with a 0102 and then 0103 error - I have to thank the forum for the heat gun fix. Next comes full blown mods and backups.

[Martinchris23]

BTW I think MS sucks - They wouldn't warranty my launch day 360 with a 0102 and then 0103 error - I have to thank the forum for the heat gun fix. Next comes full blown mods and backups.

Maybe you don't understand the criminal justice system.

You're not guilty of something until proven so by a court of law. Whatever the Police knew of his previous misgivings is entirely irrelevent. Because you've been involved in crime in the past, doesn't make you guilty automatically.

Believe it or not, he has rights too - Microsoft knew this. If they would have handed the information over without a court order, his defence could have argued that a breach of the Data Protection Act was made prior to the case going to court. Therefore, any information obtained during this time would have been thrown out and he would have been acquitted. I've seen dozens of cases where warrants/court orders weren't obtained and the evidence gathered has been dismissed.

If you were to stab someone, confess to the police and the only evidence was the weapon obtained without a warrant or court order, you would most likely be aquitted. A confession isn't proof and without solid evidence, there wouldn't be a case.

Everyone must abide by the laws - even the Police. The fact this has made news should show that MS are good at protecting data they have on you.

If MS suck that much, don't use their products. It's the best way to show your objection.

Martin

[Justincredibal]

To bad M$ won't do this for the majority of their consumers... ie AMERICANS!

Is this to the extreme, yes, but am I surprised M$ actually cared about the privacy of their consumers, better believe it.

Maybe you don't understand the criminal justice system.

You're not guilty of something until proven so by a court of law. Whatever the Police knew of his previous misgivings is entirely irrelevent. Because you've been involved in crime in the past, doesn't make you guilty automatically.

Believe it or not, he has rights too - Microsoft knew this. If they would have handed the information over without a court order, his defence could have argued that a breach of the Data Protection Act was made prior to the case going to court. Therefore, any information obtained during this time would have been thrown out and he would have been acquitted. I've seen dozens of cases where warrants/court orders weren't obtained and the evidence gathered has been dismissed.

If you were to stab someone, confess to the police and the only evidence was the weapon obtained without a warrant or court order, you would most likely be aquitted. A confession isn't proof and without solid evidence, there wouldn't be a case.

Everyone must abide by the laws - even the Police. The fact this has made news should show that MS are good at protecting data they have on you.

If MS suck that much, don't use their products. It's the best way to show your objection.

Martin

I agree with your statement about everyone abiding by the law, but I have to say you have been watching to many forensic television shows. People are RARELY accuited becuase of mis-used search warrants. Yes, the evidence can be thrown out, but once they have the information and know who the guilty person is, they can find evidence else where. Also, if it can be proved that they would have found the evidence or obtained it another way, it is usually still allowed. Its not like someone can kill someone, confess and give you all the information before you merandize them, and they are off scotch free.

This post has been edited by Justincredibal: Feb 9 2007, 02:40 PM