>Microsoft should then have a policy of not disclosing information to law enforcement unless provided with a court order.
According to the statement, that was their policy.
>The fact that microsoft ended up stating that they would do exactly this in the future should indicate that this is not the problem you are making it out to be.
The steps they said they were adding in the statement don't include going to the police. I'm not sure what you mean by this statement that could be correct.
I went over your comments again, and they contradict each other, let alone the facts.
as I said in the original comment they eventually backtracked on this and said they'd report such future crimes to the police.
Whereas your original comment doesn't mention the police at all.
I get that you feel you've been consistent, but you haven't communicated your actual thoughts very well. The other possibility here is that you don't have a firm grasp on what exactly you think Microsoft did wrong and should be doing instead. It certainly doesn't come across in your writing.
According to the statement, that was their policy.
>The fact that microsoft ended up stating that they would do exactly this in the future should indicate that this is not the problem you are making it out to be.
The steps they said they were adding in the statement don't include going to the police. I'm not sure what you mean by this statement that could be correct.
I went over your comments again, and they contradict each other, let alone the facts.
as I said in the original comment they eventually backtracked on this and said they'd report such future crimes to the police.
Whereas your original comment doesn't mention the police at all.
I get that you feel you've been consistent, but you haven't communicated your actual thoughts very well. The other possibility here is that you don't have a firm grasp on what exactly you think Microsoft did wrong and should be doing instead. It certainly doesn't come across in your writing.