A good reminder of how things actually work, but the article could use some more balancing…

> Let that sink in. You scanned your European passport for a European professional network, and your data went exclusively to North American companies. Not a single EU-based subprocessor in the chain.

LinkedIn is an American product. The EU has had 20 years to create an equally successful and popular product, which it failed to do. American companies don’t owe your European nationalist ambitions a dime. Use their products at your own discretion.

Of course an American company is subject to American law. And of course an American company will prioritise other local, similar jurisdiction companies. And often times there’s no European option that competes on quality, price, etc to begin with. In other words I don’t see why any of this is somehow uniquely wrong to the OP.

> Here’s what the CLOUD Act does in plain language: it allows US law enforcement to force any US-based company to hand over data, even if that data is stored on a server outside the United States.

European law enforcement agencies have the same powers, which they easily exercise.

> European law enforcement agencies have the same powers.

No they don’t, not in the way that is implied here. A German court can subpoena German companies. Even for 100% subsidiaries in other European or non-European countries, one needs to request legal assistance. Which then is evaluated based on local jurisdiction of the subsidiary, not the parent. Microsoft Germany as operator is subject to US law and access. See Wikipedia “American exceptionalism” for further examples.

That response reeks of astonishing arrogance. It doesn’t surprise me that nearly 50% of Americans voted for Donald Trump he perfectly embodies that mindset. Do you genuinely believe you are superior to the rest of the world? What you call “innovation” or a “better product” is often nothing more than the creation of dominant market positions through massive, capital deployment, followed by straightforward rent extraction. The European Union has every right to regulate markets operating within its jurisdiction, especially when there are credible concerns about anti-competitive practices and abuse of dominance. From what I’ve seen, there may be sufficient grounds to consider collective legal action against LinkedIn at the European level. As for so-called “European nationalist ambitions,” rest assured: Europe does not lack capable lawyers or regulatory expertise. I will be forwarding the relevant material to contacts of mine working within the European institutions in Brussels.

> In other words I don’t see why any of this is somehow uniquely wrong to the OP.

Did you read the article? It's a dark pattern. It is an act that takes 3 minutes to perform. Yet it takes multiple days of reading legal documents to understand what actually happens. I would argue this feels wrong, to most people who interact with technology.

We have a set of laws here that companies are obliged to follow, regardless of where they are incorporated, so we expect that. We are used to having some basic human rights here, perhaps unlike most Americans these days.

Data processes and ownership of biometric data should be made explicitly clear. It shouldn't take days of reading to understand. It feels wrong to me too.

One detail you might have overlooked: even if you're an American company - if you offer your services in Europe (through the web or otherwise), you're subject to European laws and regulations, including the GDPR.

The "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps" advice has more weight when the person saying it hasn't taken control of all bootstraps for a good 75 years. This is this toxicity in the toxic relationship between the US and EU. Foot in our faces telling us to pick ourselves up. Ditto South America.

I see this sentiment constantly. It is genuinely hilarious to watch Americans lecture the world about the free market while feigning shock that Europe hasn't produced its own tech giants.

Claiming "the EU had 20 years to build an equally successful product" is the geopolitical equivalent of a deeply dysfunctional 1950s household. For decades, the husband insisted he handle all the enterprise and security so he could remain the undisputed head of the family. Then, after squandering his focus on a two-decade drunken military bender in the Middle East, he stumbles home, realizes he's overextended, and screams at his wife for not having her own Silicon Valley corner office, completely ignoring that he was the one who ruthlessly bought out her ventures and demanded her dependence in the first place.

America engineered a digitally dependent Europe because it funneled global data straight to US monopolies. To blame Europeans for playing the exact role the US forced them into is historical gaslighting. And pretending the CLOUD Act's global, extraterritorial overreach is the same as local EU law enforcement is just the icing on the delusion cake.