It sounds to me like you are looking at a cloud implementation. Either you
have one or you are going to get one. You might ask around.
Chris Flynn
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:50 PM, John Montana <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The idea that records could be "disposed of" to a server not subject to US
> law (or the law of any other country) by place it outside the geographic
> boundaries of the country is not well taken. It is the activities that the
> data record that is subject to US law, and insofar as those records are
> relevant to enforcement of laws governing those activities, the records
> continue to be subject to regulatory access requirements. And if those
> records continue to exist, you cannot deny access to them based upon a
> theory that their records retention period has expired. Their current
> location is irrelevant -- regulatory requirements virtually always contain
> a provision that if the records are maintained outside the jurisdiction
> they must be made available on demand at a location convenient to the
> regulator, and in the absence of such a requirement, I am confident that a
> court would so conclude anyway. There is also something called long-arm
> jurisdiction that is routinely used as a doctrinal basis for getting at
> things and activities that are outside the geographic boundaries of a
> jurisdiction, and the boundaries of long-arm jurisdiction are growing not
> shrinking.
>
> The same is true of litigation. If the records are subject to the custody
> control of you or your agent, they are fully subject to legal process,
> regardless of where they may reside. There used to be some conflict between
> this doctrine and things like Swiss secrecy laws, but that has recently
> been resolved in favor of disclosure, much to the discomfiture of of many
> people who were relying on Swiss secrecy laws to prevent disclosure of
> Swiss banking records to the Internal Revenue Service.
>
> I am of the opinion that even trying to assert such a proposition to a
> regulator or court would be problematic. You'd almost certainly lose, and
> simply raising the defense would very naturally cause some very searching
> inquiries into just exactly what was in those records.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> John
> John Montaņa
> Montaņa & Associates
> 29 Parsons Road
> Landenberg Pennsylvania 19350
> 610-255-1588
> 484-653-8422 mobile
> [log in to unmask]
> www.montana-associates.com
> twitter: @johncmontana
>
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Ralph Better <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > It is my undertanding that there are currenlty two valid disposal
> > alternatives for records. The first is documented destruction and the
> > second is sending records to the archives.
> >
> > Hypothetically, there is now a third method. Dispose of records to a
> > repository outside US jurisdiction. Electronic records, created, used and
> > maintained outside the US,can be disposed of by transferring records
> into a
> > storage server that is not subject to US authority. The records could be
> > maintained and even used as long as they are never moved within the US
> > jurisdiction.
> >
> > Ralph Better
> >
> > List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> > Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> > To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
> present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the
> message.
> > mailto:[log in to unmask]
>
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
> present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the
> message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
|
