OK Lawyers, Question:. Non Cloud Client requests lost data (hardware problems)

[RJSV]

   Hey, say you've heard that Google Cloud, for instance, will save portions of your stuff...photos etc. even in cases where, say, you own a Google device, camera etc but ARE NOT subscriber.

   Heck, maybe they inform you of that, cryptically, that some data may be saved for diagnosing CLOUD system problems.
   Seems fair, along with reasonable fees of course, that you can access your 'lost' deleted or due to hard drive fail,...considering that some big parent company, there, has a copy of 'Grandma', which some wouldn't like, considering privacy concerns.

Yeah I know about fine print, but supposing I'd wish to challenge that dynamic...
  Lawyers ?   Anybody have answers ?

(thanks)

[Stray Electron]

   Hey, say you've heard that Google Cloud, for instance, will save portions of your stuff...photos etc. even in cases where, say, you own a Google device, camera etc but ARE NOT subscriber.

   Heck, maybe they inform you of that, cryptically, that some data may be saved for diagnosing CLOUD system problems.
   Seems fair, along with reasonable fees of course, that you can access your 'lost' deleted or due to hard drive fail,...considering that some big parent company, there, has a copy of 'Grandma', which some wouldn't like, considering privacy concerns.

Yeah I know about fine print, but supposing I'd wish to challenge that dynamic...
  Lawyers ?   Anybody have answers ?

(thanks)

     ??  "but ARE NOT subscriber"  /=  "that you can access your 'lost'"   

    The words " a snowball's chance in hell" seems to be appropriate here.  But MAYBE if you have a court order.

    But my understanding is that that is one reason that Microsoft located their spy-ware data banks in Ireland was so that they would not be subject to US (what I heard) court orders.   OTOH I have heard that there are a couple of divorce cases going on in the US where the plaintiff wants to see their spouses' E-mails, browsing history, etc  and the judge in the case as ordered MS to produce them.

   My 2 cents worth.

[RJSV]

Thanks for comment.
   To clarify, I'm trying to say that if a business entity is accumulating 'private' data, let's just say on a fictional 'Smith-Phone', including private family pictures, I.E. Grandma, now diseased, then...fair is fair;
Then that data could be recovered, even though there isn't a provider-client relation, 'formally'.
I say 'formally' because the other party is collecting the data outside of any deliberate relation.  Rather, (I'm saying), that business entity, SmithPhones, has cleverly attempted to evade any relation.  They just are going to collect (your data), and declare that the business has changed, by way of small print, in the original purchase.

[Stray Electron]

    OK now I understand what you were getting at.  In that case I would say that the data is certainly recovered at least in part but by the company in question and their, ah hmm, "business partners".  Call me pessimistic but I doubt that most of these companies even have the capability of recovering more or less all of your data and a business mechanism whereby they could return it to you.  But I'm sure as hell that unless you are the local government, they're not going to recover someone else's data and return it to you.  That would open them up to a world of lawsuits involving Invasions of Privacy and host of other issues.  Maybe one day, but not yet.  Perhaps after we're dead, they'll find, or probably create, some legal basis where they can sell our information to the whole world and not just to governments and to other data marketeers.

[rteodor]

Soooo... let me understand please: the OS manufacturer has access to the hardware and can see a data storage failure approaching. Then it copies data without anybody knowing (but with legal backing in the ToS) then charge for giving it back. Isn't this a perfectly "legal ransomware" business opportunity ?

[RJSV]

   I'm a cynic myself (see last post, thanks).  BUT it's important to have some give and take.
I'm thinking, if suppose my hard drive fails, that I should have the right of access, with reasonable charges, to some personal photo (i.e. Grandma).
That's not a hard drive recovery, but rather a limited duplicate.  But, of course, there is a whole set of problems, starting with the issue of whether or not that particular item is even there, (in cloud or whatever).
   So, let's say that SmithPhones already is involved in an AI experiment project, survey of public head sizes or something, where you could, with confidence, assume they've processed and stored that one item.
   It's a huge burden, I know, and likely has too many factors, to assume one has full rights, to request a copy, generally, of anything lost, (in hypothetical disk drive fail).
   Still, both our business and personal lives getting tangled, with modern smart phones.  Honestly, I've done Patent work before, over a several year period, and in those days smart cell phones were rare.  Now, these days, I would be concerned, images and text being so accessable to other parties.  Modern parent companies seem to be able to download or optionally go in and delete files at will...

[abeyer]

But ultimately you're just saying you want the court to force them to do business with you, even if it's a line of business they don't offer and they don't want to. Sure, you could try that... but it doesn't seem like a position that many courts have been willing to take.

[RJSV]

   It is, admittedly, a sticky issue.  Should maybe be a discussion for lawyer on lawyer.  But my problem is the disconnect; to be doing business, selling my data, while, simultaneously NOT doing business involving my data...that's just dishonest, and selective, giving benefit to other (potentially unknown) customers...Not to mention potentially sharing, amoung those separated entities.