> Electronic Communications Act (2022:482) (LEK) Does not apply to Mullvad VPN AB
According to LEK’s definitions, LEK does not apply to Mullvad since we, as a VPN service provider are not regarded as an electronic communications network nor an electronic communications service.<p>This is super interesting. I don't know anything about Swedish law, but I'd find it difficult to believe that a VPN provider in the USA would not fall into one of those two classifications. The devil is in the details, of course: definitions of terms of art such as these usually accompany the rules or laws that involve them - at least under U.S. law.<p>I would <i>love</i> to hear from a qualified Swedish lawyer on the question.
> We have now received a response from the Swedish Prosecution Authority and the prosecutor in charge of the operation, who told us that the search warrant was a decision made in international legal cooperation with Germany<p>Yes that's the crux of it. Similarly, - the US can't legally spy on it's citizens, but it could absolutely sell the same spy software to Australia and let Australia spy on our citizens, and then broker the data back and forth. Psh those pesky civil rights seem to go out the window as long as a foreign country is asking.
They say that the laws do not apply to them, but has this been tried in court?<p>We can be sure of one thing: of everyone started using VPNs and the laws do not actually apply, the laws would change
Their summary at the end is a hell of a statement. Not many organizations would reasonably be able to say such a thing. Funny that a served warrant happens to be good marketing but I guess that's just the world we live in.
The previous thread about this incident was incredibly frustrating to read, with many more or less openly saying that Mullvad was lying or somehow secretly cooperating with authorities in order to keep their hardware. Hopefully this post can convince these people that what happened isn’t as incredible and unrealistic as they seem to assume.
Interesting read. If anyone else got curious why Amagicom AB was mentioned, it seems to be the parent company of Mullvad.<p>I'm still surprised the police left without any fuzz because Mullvad surely must keep track of both transactions and the connected computers (to limit use). But maybe that data is stored somewhere else.<p>I'm also a bit surprised it took the police one month from the approved search warrant to them actually doing it. Unless I misunderstood.