PBS高端访谈:微软就秘密检查用户数据问题起诉美国司法部

 　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Now: a high-profile showdown between a tech giant and the U.S. government over accessing private data.

　　This time, it's Microsoft. Yesterday, the company filed a suit against the Department of Justice in federal court. Microsoft argues it's unconstitutional for the government to ask for customers' personal data or e-mails in most cases without the individuals' knowledge. The company says it's received more than 5,600 requests for such data from the government in the last year-and-a-half, often from the cloud or remote servers. And nearly half of those requests come with a ban from the government on alerting customers.

　　Brad Smith is the president of Microsoft. He joins me from company headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

　　And welcome to the program, Brad Smith.

　　I do want to point out we invited the Department of Justice to join the interview, but they declined.

　　So, let me begin by asking you, what is it that the federal government is doing that Microsoft doesn't like?

　　微软就秘密检查用户数据问题起诉美国司法部

　　BRAD SMITH, President, Microsoft: Well, what gives us concern is the fact we have received almost 2,600 — almost 2,600 of these so-called gag or secrecy¹ orders over the last 18 months.

　　Over two-thirds of them have no end date at all. So it means that we are permanently² prohibited from telling customers that the government has accessed, read and obtained copies of their e-mails. We feel that infringes³ on the constitutional rights of consumers and businesses to be secure from unreasonable⁴ government searches.

　　It infringes on our First Amendment⁵ right to speak, to share information with our customers.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, we know the Justice Department has not responded to the lawsuit⁶. They have not said anything publicly, but we know that in the past they have said these are investigations⁷ that involve criminals, people who are breaking the law, that involve — that are perhaps involved in potential terrorist acts.

　　Why not work with the government when they're trying to go after the bad guys?

　　BRAD SMITH: Well, this is an issue that we have discussed with various officials in government for some time.

　　And we readily recognize that there are many cases where there should be some kind of secrecy, that there is a real danger if information is disclosed. But we feel that these kinds of secrecy orders have been — become too routine. They're being issued in cases that involve businesses, as well as consumers.

　　And it especially concerns us that there is no end date. Let's face it. Forever is a long time. Even military secrets are declassified⁸ eventually. Why should we have a country where people will never learn that the government has accessed their e-mails?

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, I was reading today that some investigators⁹ who have worked on, I guess, in this area have said that if you notify people who are being investigated, you run the risk that they are going to change their communication pattern, they're going to tamper¹⁰ with evidence. They may even try to leave the country. What about that?

　　BRAD SMITH: Well, that really goes to the point that, yes, there are times when a nondisclosure order is a sensible thing to do.

　　But the law in this case does, in our view, not require the government to make the kind of compelling showing that it should, and, hence, the government is getting these kinds of orders in too many cases. And even in cases where this kind of secrecy is needed, eventually, the need for secrecy goes away.

　　And yet, even then, people will never learn that the government accessed their e-mail. And that, as much as anything, really runs, we think, right into the constitutional protections we all should enjoy.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Brad Smith, what do you say to those who look at this and say, well, this is just an effort to do what's good for business, rather than what's good for the American people, for the American government?

　　BRAD SMITH: Well, I think this is fundamentally about what is good for people and their rights. It is good for technology. It is good for businesses who are customers as well, whose e-mails are being read.

　　But, most importantly, I think it's about one thing. It's about ensuring the kinds of values that we have had in this country under the Constitution for 230 years remain intact even as technology changes, and information that we have long stored on paper is now stored in the cloud instead.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Did you think about another course of action other than filing suit? Did you try to sit down with the government and talk to them about what they're doing?

　　BRAD SMITH: We have had multiple conversations about these and similar issues. And this lawsuit doesn't for an instant mean that those kinds of conversations should come to an end.

　　I definitely believe that, ultimately, across the technology sphere, it's going to take a lot of good discussion to find new solutions. But we have found in recent cases that things were going the wrong way, not the right way, and there does come a point when you just have to put a stake in the ground and say that these constitutional rights matter, and we need the courts to intervene.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Is there a middle ground, though? Is there some — something, some level of information the government could share with you that would make you comfortable turning this individual's e-mails over to them without notifying the individual?

　　BRAD SMITH: I think we always have to ask ourselves at the end of the day, is there some kind of middle ground that might emerge? And I think the answer is probably yes.

　　If we look at other statutes¹¹ in other areas of federal law, there is typically a right for the government in the right circumstances to keep something secret for 30 days or 90 days, and, if the need continues, the government can go back, and it has to make its case before a magistrate¹² yet again.

　　I think that if we could move this area of the law to be more like that kind of area, we'd find a middle ground emerge.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: And just finally, there are some who are looking at this and saying, is this some kind of a turning point in this, I guess, larger tech industry — battle with the tech industry — battle with the government on the part of the tech industry over privacy, over the citizens' privacy?

　　BRAD SMITH: Well, I think we're living in a time where it feels like there is a turning point every other month.

　　When I step back from it all, I think what we're seeing is this evolution of technology, people storing things digitally, storing them in data centers. And across the board, whether you're in government or you're in the tech sector¹³, we're all trying to find a path, so that the traditional values we have had in this country, the traditional rights we have enjoyed, will remain, so that information that's stored in the cloud gets the same kind of protection as information stored on paper.

　　That, I think, is what we need to continue to seek.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft, we thank you for talking with us.

　　BRAD SMITH: Thank you.

1 secrecy   

n.秘密，保密，隐蔽

参考例句：

• All the researchers on the project are sworn to secrecy.该项目的所有研究人员都按要求起誓保守秘密。
• Complete secrecy surrounded the meeting.会议在绝对机密的环境中进行。

2 permanently   

adv.永恒地，永久地，固定不变地

参考例句：

• The accident left him permanently scarred.那次事故给他留下了永久的伤疤。
• The ship is now permanently moored on the Thames in London.该船现在永久地停泊在伦敦泰晤士河边。

3 infringes   

v.违反（规章等）( infringe的第三人称单数 )；侵犯（某人的权利）；侵害（某人的自由、权益等）

参考例句：

• Congressmen may be reluctant to vote for legislation that infringes the traditional prerogatives of the states. 美国国会议员可能不情愿投票拥护侵犯各州传统特权的立法。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法
• I can't say whether CP21 infringes it or not. 我就不能说CP21是否侵犯了SPOT的专利。 来自企业管理英语口语（第二版）(2)

4 unreasonable   

adj.不讲道理的，不合情理的，过度的

参考例句：

• I know that they made the most unreasonable demands on you.我知道他们对你提出了最不合理的要求。
• They spend an unreasonable amount of money on clothes.他们花在衣服上的钱太多了。

5 amendment   

n.改正，修正，改善，修正案

参考例句：

• The amendment was rejected by 207 voters to 143.这项修正案以207票对143票被否决。
• The Opposition has tabled an amendment to the bill.反对党已经就该议案提交了一项修正条款。

6 lawsuit   

n.诉讼，控诉

参考例句：

• They threatened him with a lawsuit.他们以诉讼威逼他。
• He was perpetually involving himself in this long lawsuit.他使自己无休止地卷入这场长时间的诉讼。

7 investigations   

（正式的）调查( investigation的名词复数 )； 侦查； 科学研究； 学术研究

参考例句：

• His investigations were intensive and thorough but revealed nothing. 他进行了深入彻底的调查，但没有发现什么。
• He often sent them out to make investigations. 他常常派他们出去作调查。

8 declassified   

adj.解密的v.对（机密文件等）销密( declassify的过去式和过去分词 )

参考例句：

• Thousands of classified documents have now been declassified. 数以千计的保密文件现在被解密了。
• The software used for Siemens S7-300 encryption logic block declassified. 此软件用于对西门子S7-300加密逻辑块解密。

9 investigators   

n.调查者，审查者( investigator的名词复数 )

参考例句：

• This memo could be the smoking gun that investigators have been looking for. 这份备忘录可能是调查人员一直在寻找的证据。
• The team consisted of six investigators and two secretaries. 这个团队由六个调查人员和两个秘书组成。 来自《简明英汉词典》

10 tamper   

v.干预，玩弄，贿赂，窜改，削弱，损害

参考例句：

• Do not tamper with other's business.不要干预别人的事。
• They had strict orders not to tamper with the customs of the minorities.他们得到命令严禁干涉少数民族的风俗习惯。

11 statutes   

成文法( statute的名词复数 )； 法令； 法规； 章程

参考例句：

• The numerous existing statutes are complicated and poorly coordinated. 目前繁多的法令既十分复杂又缺乏快调。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法
• Each agency is also restricted by the particular statutes governing its activities. 各个机构的行为也受具体法令限制。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法

12 magistrate   

n.地方行政官，地方法官，治安官

参考例句：

• The magistrate committed him to prison for a month.法官判处他一个月监禁。
• John was fined 1000 dollars by the magistrate.约翰被地方法官罚款1000美元。

13 sector   

n.部门，部分；防御地段，防区；扇形

参考例句：

• The export sector will aid the economic recovery. 出口产业将促进经济复苏。
• The enemy have attacked the British sector.敌人已进攻英国防区。