Microsoft has shown that they are quite willing to access induviduals private data if they have a financial stake in it [0]. Yes, they eventually backtracked under public pressure (after trying very hard to justify how it&#x27;s totally okay because they were going to pay a lawyer to rubber-stamp things in the future), but it&#x27;s rather hard to listen to their general council talking about how they value privacy on principle given their history. It&#x27;s quite obvious they only care about privacy insofar as it affects their bottom line.<p>The article also conflates (intentionally?) this issue with the mass-surveillance issue, bringing Snowden into it and insinuating that this ruling would have an effect on that, which is just silly [1].<p>The whole &quot;Company F&quot; section is interesting (hadn&#x27;t heard before that microsoft is challenging the statement that they were willingly providing user data to the NSA), but it&#x27;s a bit hard to square with the leaked documents which list microsoft as the first participating partner in the PRISM program [2]<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.geekwire.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;microsoft-defends-hotmail-snooping-windows-leak-investigation&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.geekwire.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;microsoft-defends-hotmail-snoop...</a>
[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbsnews.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;patriot-act-can-obtain-data-in-europe-researchers-say&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbsnews.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;patriot-act-can-obtain-data-in-e...</a>
[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.motherjones.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;2013&#x2F;09&#x2F;nsa-timeline-surveillance" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.motherjones.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;2013&#x2F;09&#x2F;nsa-timeline-sur...</a>