Skype summoned to court in Belgium

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

If they have a valid reason, why isn't it enough to put the criminals into jail?

If the reason they have is good enough to get the info from skype, it's good enough to put them into jail. no?

It just doesn't make sense. They need a reason to get the info, but if they have a reason, they don't need the skype stuff to get them into jail.

 

If it's the actual content of the conversations they want, it's basically the same as a wiretap, something every civilized country has been using for ages as part of proper policework and evidence gathering.

Those have always been highly regulated, so they won't just ask those for every small crime. 

If it's the metadata, they could be investigating whether or not the suspects are part of a bigger network than they expected.

If a car thief for instance makes 5 calls per week to friend, who then makes half a dozen calls per week to a bodyshop, it might be a good idea to look into that bodyshop. This is how big networks are often discovered.

Again, that's normal procedure all around the world (except for the US and UK, where they seem to think that procedures aren't needed anymore nowadays).

 

As for why they need such info :

1 ) The more evidence you have, the better.  If a judge dismisses part of your evidence (which does happen over the stupidest things, like a misplaced comma on a warrant or a typo in a license plate), it's always good to have something else.

2 ) If you can listen in on criminals planning an activity, you can more easily catch them in the act or prevent people from being robbed, injured or killed.

3 ) sometimes you only have circumstantial evidence and/or need something to link everything together.  Phone conversations can be the key to cracking a case or not.

[mr moose]

I've long advocated that the internet, VOIP, telephone, email, and physical mail should all come under the same privacy protections as each other.  Seeing as an open court has ordered the information on reasonable grounds it is fair for MS to hand over the information.   Although It does concern me that voice chat has being recorded. In Australia telephone service providers are not allowed to record voice chat.

[mr moose]

If they have a valid reason, why isn't it enough to put the criminals into jail?

If the reason they have is good enough to get the info from skype, it's good enough to put them into jail. no?

It just doesn't make sense. They need a reason to get the info, but if they have a reason, they don't need the skype stuff to get them into jail.

 

Most legal systems work on a stepped basis, that is a policeman cannot search your car unless he has reasonable grounds (saw you in the act or your details match a report), if he finds stuff that is suspicious then he can obtain a warrant from a court to search your house, for further evidence.  Having found evidence that will stand up in court they can then charge that person.  The evidence in the first step is not enough for a charge or conviction but enough to legitimize searching for further evidence.  This is how it should work. With regard to skype, the investigators have reasonable suspicion based on current evidence that the suspect is part of a bigger operation, their current evidence is not enough for a conviction or to prove outright guilt, but it is enough to warrant further investigation which in this case is searching his skype history for further evidence that will either clear his name or prove him guilty. 

 

So you see the police/investigators can have enough evidence to legitimately search for further evidence while at the same time it not be enough to lay official charges.

[Northmountain]

The fact the criminals will go to jail or not won't make a huge difference for the normal people.

The criminals are known for being in the "underworld" so they probably won't bother us (normal average people) anyway.

We all know it exists, but i've never seen anything from them in the normal world. And we probably never will.

 

Hahaha wtf are you on?

[StareX]

60,000 would be 60 EUR. We note numbers differently.

It's a forum with different people all over the word, you want to "note numbers differently" place that note in the damn thread. It's confusing.

[SirRoderick]

It's a forum with different people all over the word, you want to "note numbers differently" place that note in the damn thread. It's confusing.

Hey there mister inexplicably hostile, had a bad day?  :wacko:

[StareX]

Hey there mister inexplicably hostile, had a bad day?  :wacko:

No. I'm stating a fact.

[SirRoderick]

No. I'm stating a fact.

Well you did put a fact in there, but it was mostly being a dick to someone who doesn't even own the thread.

[Stefken89]

Well, screw belgium, they are stupid. 

"we need skype calls and texts to proof they are criminals" Well if you know they are criminals, you must have prove enough for that.

Just a bunch of BS, belgium, i hope you will fail.

The fact the criminals will go to jail or not won't make a huge difference for the normal people.

The criminals are known for being in the "underworld" so they probably won't bother us (normal average people) anyway.

We all know it exists, but i've never seen anything from them in the normal world. And we probably never will.

 

I don't know what planet you are on atm, but it sure as hell isn't Earth. Never seen anything of a criminal organisation in the "normal world"? Maybe you haven't seen it in person (I haven't either, I hope it stays that way), but there are things happening all over the globe every day... It's not because they don't affect your everyday life right now, they shouldn't try to stop them. No, a few of them in prison won't make that much of a difference, but those few may lead to more info about the organisation as a whole. And even if it doesn't, it lets the organisation know people are watching them and trying to stop them. You think they will be hiding if they know nothing will stop them? Ask some people in Afghanistan what they think about it. Is the Taliban hiding? Do they affect their "normal" lives?

This is just one example.

 

Concerning "Well if you know they are criminals, you must have proof enough for that."

 

They are "suspected criminals". That means they have reasons to believe they are, not definite proof. That's why they are asking for the records. 

Let's say I told the police I saw you stealing in a store, but you didn't do it. There is a security camera in the store, but the store doesn't have to give it up, so they don't. At that point it's just my word against yours. Would you be okay with being convicted? 'Cause you are a suspected criminal at that point until proven otherwise.

 

 

I agree with one point though, 60000€ is nothing for a large (telecom?) provider like Skype.

[Takata]

I don't see what Skype has to gain by stonewalling a specific, targeted request for information which appears to be backed up by evidence already collected. Is it some misguided attempt to show that Skype does its best to protect the privacy of its users? ...even when those users are suspects of a criminal investigation? ...unless they can cast a shadow on said criminal investigation.

[samcool55]

I don't know what planet you are on atm, but it sure as hell isn't Earth. Never seen anything of a criminal organisation in the "normal world"? Maybe you haven't seen it in person (I haven't either, I hope it stays that way), but there are things happening all over the globe every day... It's not because they don't affect your everyday life right now, they shouldn't try to stop them. No, a few of them in prison won't make that much of a difference, but those few may lead to more info about the organisation as a whole. And even if it doesn't, it lets the organisation know people are watching them and trying to stop them. You think they will be hiding if they know nothing will stop them? Ask some people in Afghanistan what they think about it. Is the Taliban hiding? Do they affect their "normal" lives?

This is just one example.

 

Concerning "Well if you know they are criminals, you must have proof enough for that."

 

They are "suspected criminals". That means they have reasons to believe they are, not definite proof. That's why they are asking for the records. 

Let's say I told the police I saw you stealing in a store, but you didn't do it. There is a security camera in the store, but the store doesn't have to give it up, so they don't. At that point it's just my word against yours. Would you be okay with being convicted? 'Cause you are a suspected criminal at that point until proven otherwise.

 

 

I agree with one point though, 60000€ is nothing for a large (telecom?) provider like Skype.

U got a point, and i am on planet earth to be clear. But i hate the belgian goverment.

They make a big deal of this, bigger than it should be. They have much bigger issues, but they don't bother doing anything about it.

It feels more like a distraction from the real issues they have, and that's why i want them to fail for this. 

The normal people can't say "screw you" to the gov, and going on a strike, the last resort for the normal people, doesn't even help. Just look at the trains.

Yes it might be bad if skype doesn't help them, but on the other end, at least someone managed to screw the gov, a bit. Something that they imho deserve.

 

I was thinking the gov was just whining again, seems like i was wrong, but still. They shouldn't whine as much about it as they are now.

[Stefken89]

U got a point, and i am on planet earth to be clear. But i hate the belgian goverment.

They make a big deal of this, bigger than it should be. They have much bigger issues, but they don't bother doing anything about it.

It feels more like a distraction from the real issues they have, and that's why i want them to fail for this. 

The normal people can't say "screw you" to the gov, and going on a strike, the last resort for the normal people, doesn't even help. Just look at the trains.

Yes it might be bad if skype doesn't help them, but on the other end, at least someone managed to screw the gov, a bit. Something that they imho deserve.

 

I was thinking the gov was just whining again, seems like i was wrong, but still. They shouldn't whine as much about it as they are now.

 

I agree partly. The Belgian government has enormous problems to solve & they are doing it nor fast nor good enough atm. Like you said, people going for a strike (like tomorrow with the trains not riding out mostly) is not helping. At this point the only thing they accomplish is punishing other working people & costing lots of money for the companies, which in turn does not help the economical situation. I have seen first hand big customers for a company I worked for leave because producing in Belgium was too expensive because of all the striking. It was cheaper for the company in question to move to another country and shipping everything here. It's part of the reason I was laid off and now have to look for another job.

 

While I understand the sentiment (not really fond of our government myself), hoping that they will fail in other areas as well will not help either, imho. This will screw the people over in the long term as well. 

[samcool55]

I agree partly. The Belgian government has enormous problems to solve & they are doing it nor fast nor good enough atm. Like you said, people going for a strike (like tomorrow with the trains not riding out mostly) is not helping. At this point the only thing they accomplish is punishing other working people & costing lots of money for the companies, which in turn does not help the economical situation. I have seen first hand big customers for a company I worked for leave because producing in Belgium was too expensive because of all the striking. It was cheaper for the company in question to move to another country and shipping everything here. It's part of the reason I was laid off and now have to look for another job.

 

While I understand the sentiment (not really fond of our government myself), hoping that they will fail in other areas as well will not help either, imho. This will screw the people over in the long term as well. 

Well completely failing will make it only worse, true. But it would be nice if they get "the middle finger" from skype by not giving what they want.

They don't give us what we want, well then they shouldn't get what they want. Seems fair to me. And if it are just small things that are mostly just an irritation for them. I don't have a problem with it. But if it starts to affect the normal people, well then we are all screwed.

In a way it's actually funny how "stupid" the gov is. Complaining our economy is going backwards (yes it's changing, but they have complained a lot about it in the past). And when you search why it's bad, it's partially their own fault by being b*stards. Oh well

[Stefken89]

Well completely failing will make it only worse, true. But it would be nice if they get "the middle finger" from skype by not giving what they want.

They don't give us what we want, well then they shouldn't get what they want. Seems fair to me. And if it are just small things that are mostly just an irritation for them. I don't have a problem with it. But if it starts to affect the normal people, well then we are all screwed.

In a way it's actually funny how "stupid" the gov is. Complaining our economy is going backwards (yes it's changing, but they have complained a lot about it in the past). And when you search why it's bad, it's partially their own fault by being b*stards. Oh well

 

Problem is, you have to find ways to give them the middle finger that won't affect other people, but that are clear enough to them that they will react by solving actual problems. 

This Skype thing is not clear enough, since it's not an action coming from the people + possible release of criminals also affects the people.

 

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you mean, and feel largely the same way, just want to inform you that this is not really the correct way of solving the "how to boycott the government-problem" :-).

[KirbyTech]

I don't see what Skype has to gain by stonewalling a specific, targeted request for information which appears to be backed up by evidence already collected. Is it some misguided attempt to show that Skype does its best to protect the privacy of its users? ...even when those users are suspects of a criminal investigation? ...unless they can cast a shadow on said criminal investigation.

I think Skype would give it up if he was a convicted criminal but at this point they are just on trial and pretty sure the US goes by innocent until proven guilty. Or at least that is how their law says it.

[SirRoderick]

Problem is, you have to find ways to give them the middle finger that won't affect other people, but that are clear enough to them that they will react by solving actual problems. 

This Skype thing is not clear enough, since it's not an action coming from the people + possible release of criminals also affects the people.

 

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you mean, and feel largely the same way, just want to inform you that this is not really the correct way of solving the "how to boycott the government-problem" :-).

On subject of the train-strikes. In my experience people are so fed up with it by now, because of the constant disruptions to their travel, that they really blame the train workers now for the problems. Which surely is the complete opposite of what you want to achieve. 

 

That said we are royally (harhar) screwed on several fronts due to apathy or simply antagonism in the government.

 

At least we're not governed by a Tory majority.

[NeatSquidYT]

Skype sucks. I want it to just die. TeamSpeak all the way

[Stefken89]

On subject of the train-strikes. In my experience people are so fed up with it by now, because of the constant disruptions to their travel, that they really blame the train workers now for the problems. Which surely is the complete opposite of what you want to achieve. 

 

That said we are royally (harhar) screwed on several fronts due to apathy or simply antagonism in the government.4

 

At least we're not governed b ya Tory majority.

 

That like was for the "royally" pun :-D 

 

Can you really blame the people for blaming the train workers?

Well, the way I see it is that multiple parties get screwed by the train-strikes, but only one that matters gets hit, and there are a lot of random casualties: NMBS (for non Belgians, the company that runs the railways) - they want to hit them, the people who can't ride the train - casualty, companies that rely on railway traffic - casualty, but also companies that rely on traffic by road (more people on the road = more traffic jams and whatnot...) - casualty. The one thing that does not really get screwed is the government. 

 

Plus, tbh, the train workers have a pretty good life, and don't have enough reason to complain like they do all the time. They act like they have the worst job in the world while they are getting payed a lot, have a lot of vacation days and a lot of benefits in comparison to other working people.

 

Other working people do not have the power/luxury to strike, but they are constantly victims of strike by them. I would be pissed as well. I am, and I'm not even a real victim since I don't use the trains.

[SirRoderick]

That like was for the "royally" pun :-D 

 

Can you really blame the people for blaming the train workers?

Well, the way I see it is that multiple parties get screwed by the train-strikes, but only one that matters gets hit, and there are a lot of random casualties: NMBS (for non Belgians, the company that runs the railways) - they want to hit them, the people who can't ride the train - casualty, companies that rely on railway traffic - casualty, but also companies that rely on traffic by road (more people on the road = more traffic jams and whatnot...) - casualty. The one thing that does not really get screwed is the government. 

 

Plus, tbh, the train workers have a pretty good life, and don't have enough reason to complain like they do all the time. They act like they have the worst job in the world while they are getting payed a lot, have a lot of vacation days and a lot of benefits in comparison to other working people.

 

Other working people do not have the power/luxury to strike, but they are constantly victims of strike by them. I would be pissed as well. I am, and I'm not even a real victim since I don't use the trains.

Nothing really to add to that. I'd take a railway job

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

I think Skype would give it up if he was a convicted criminal but at this point they are just on trial and pretty sure the US goes by innocent until proven guilty. Or at least that is how their law says it.

Belgium also goes by innocent until proven guilty. However a wiretap is common in criminal investigations all around the world. It even was a perfectly normal procedure in the US before they used 9/11 as an excuse to go bat-shit crazy and just listen in on everyone regardless of suspicion.

[Centurius]

Well completely failing will make it only worse, true. But it would be nice if they get "the middle finger" from skype by not giving what they want.

They don't give us what we want, well then they shouldn't get what they want. Seems fair to me. And if it are just small things that are mostly just an irritation for them. I don't have a problem with it. But if it starts to affect the normal people, well then we are all screwed.

In a way it's actually funny how "stupid" the gov is. Complaining our economy is going backwards (yes it's changing, but they have complained a lot about it in the past). And when you search why it's bad, it's partially their own fault by being b*stards. Oh well

A country's judicial system isn't exactly its government.

[samcool55]

A country's judicial system isn't exactly its government.

Well, true, but the gov decides how the system works.

If they screw up the system, and the system fails, it's sort of their fault by making it bad in the first place.

So if skype doesn't give the judge or whatever what they want, it's still a sort of "middle finger" to the gov by just ignoring the system they made.

[dalekphalm]

A country's judicial system isn't exactly its government.

Uh... actually... it is.

 

In the same way that Police or the Military are part of the government.

 

While the judicial system isn't THE government (Since, the government isn't one single body, not even the president/prime minister, etc), they are still part of the government body.

 

The justice system is generally part of the Executive Branch of government (The specifics will of course vary per country).