Law enforcement/Courts and legal provisions and transparency of requests

Service: (NONE)
Case: none
Changes: 2
Source: link
Author: import script Bot

Law enforcement/Courts and legal provisions and transparency of requests

On 2018-05-18 14:05:17 UTC, Deleted wrote:

imported from 2493

On 2018-05-23 12:40:44 UTC, Deleted wrote:!msg/tosdr/_n3D7wmGUwY/NAVdF_NZfxcJ I have not found the topic on this subject, so I made one of mine.
First of all, I really like your initiative and I hope it will gain success
in the future! And I hope that my comments will be useful too.
One thing what we should not forget about Terms of Service is that actually
there are questions, when you do not obligatory have to put information for
customers on "Transparency on law enforcement requests". Why? Because the
law enforcement requests are regulated by the legislation of the respected
country, where you receive the services. And not only country - even
region. For example, in European Union - there is one interesting legal
act, which is the Data Retention Directive. Here will be a
short description from Wikipedia( and here is a link
to the legal act itself (
The *Data Retention Directive*, more formally "Directive 2006/24/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of
data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly
available electronic communications services or of public communications
networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC" is a Directive issued
by the European Union and
relates to Telecommunications data retention.
According to the directive, member states will have to store citizens'
telecommunications data for six to 24 months stipulating a maximum time
period. Under the directive the police and security agencies will be able
to request access to details such as IP address and time of use of every
email, phone call and text message sent or received. A permission to access
the information will be granted only by a court.
So, what does it mean? The Directive has to be transposed to the national
legislation of every country of the European Union, basically part or all
of the provisions have to be included in the legal acts of
the corresponding topic.
In this case, the mentioning of this Directive or it's provisions does not
have to be done it ToS as it is by law. I am not " a devil's advocate", but
it is a reality.
Unfortunately, I did not have time to google more on the subject of not
European Union cases, so I don't have enough info about US or other
countries. But this was just for example and maybe somebody could
contribute it.

-- // //
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Visit this group at
For more options, visit

On 2018-05-30 12:50:29 UTC, Deleted wrote:

imported status as declined

We track editorial changes to analyses and updates to a point's status and display the previous versions here as part of an effort to promote transparency regarding our curation process.

Version 1: 2018-05-30 12:50:29 UTC by Deleted

Previous Title: No changes recorded

Updated Title: No changes recorded

Previous Analysis: No changes recorded

Updated Analysis: No changes recorded

Previous Status: PENDING

Updated Status: DECLINED

Version 2: 2018-05-18 14:05:17 UTC by Deleted

Previous Title:

Updated Title: Law enforcement/Courts and legal provisions and transparency of requests

Previous Analysis:

Updated Analysis: Law enforcement/Courts and legal provisions and transparency of requests

Previous Status:

Updated Status: PENDING